Nature and BBC's news report refuting the so-called evolutionary scenario

An article published in Nature journal in June 8th, 2017 featured the human fossil remains recently discovered in Morocco, which are estimated to be 315,000 years old. Thus, the discovery has given rise to the discussion that the origin of Homo Sapience species might date back to 100,000 years earlier than thought before. BBC in particular, the local news outlets such as Sözcü newspaper, ODA TV, even Cyprus Post tried to present the claims in the article as supporting evidence for the evolutionary scenario.

First of all it should be noted that the origin of mankind dating back way earlier than previously thought has nothing to do with evolution. New age determination methods were utilized in the study, which led to the discovery of the fossil remains belonging to members of human species dating back to 315,000 years before. Indeed, the oldest known fossils belonged to a human who said to live in East Africa 200,000 years ago. Once the recently acquired information is verified, it will push back mankind's origins by 100,000 years and replace East Africa with North Africa as the discovery location of the oldest known human remains. 

The data concerning the fossils drew different interpretations and BBC being in particular, many local and foreign news outlets put forth numerous arguments in order to save face for the evolution theory. Yet all the efforts are in vain. The discovery of human fossils dating way back and the fact that mankind preserved its physical qualities for a longer period than thought offers proof not to evolution but to creation. Well aware of this fact, Darwinists, as always, have kept fossils away from the public. No sooner had the fossils in question been featured in the article then the fact that these fossils were revealed to having been kept away from the public for 55 years.

Fossils that were kept secret for years

In 1960s, during an excavation in Jebel Irhoud region for extracting barite element, minors unearthed an almost complete human fossil. In 1967 and 1969, further excavations in the same region conducted by Jacques Tixier and Roger de Bayle des Hermens unearthed tools such as knives, arrowheads, ice scraping tools and drills.  Along with these, the excavations also unearthed skulls as well as the fossils of jawbone, thigh bone and femur belonging to a child. However as, according to the Darwinists, such early human presence in history does not conform to the so-called evolutionary scenario, all the discovered bones and tools were presented to be 40,000 years old and claimed to belong to Neanderthals, an assertion that stands refuted today.

The excavations carried out in the same region since 2004 were announced to have found 20 new human bone fossils, among which were skull, tooth and jawbone fossils that belong to three adults, a teenager and a child of about seven years.

It was also announced that among the discoveries, there were numerous tools, deer bones carrying marks suggesting these people were engaged in butchery,  and various burn marks indicating the existence of cooking and baking in that era.

As we have just stated, falsely presenting the age determination of these fossils to be 40,000, evolutionists introduced these fossils as a species related to Neanderthals. However,  new age determination studies conducted on the jawbones, which had been discovered in 1969 and claimed to be 40 years old, revealed the origin of these bones to be human and their age to be between 280,000 to 350,000 years.

Prof. Hublin tried to gloss over the hoax through his following words; "The fossils looked far too "primitive" to be anything understandable, so people came up with some weird ideas." But this example is highly crucial in that it laid bare to what extent evolutionist can go to arbitrarily distort scientific evidence and how erroneous their claims can be. 

Chris Stinger, a paleoanthropologist at the British Museum of Natural History, also confessed to 'first seeing these fossils in 1970s and being baffled when he realized that they did not belong to Neanderthals.' To save face, Stinger claimed, "They seemed too young and primitive-looking to be human," yet this effort, too, is in vain.

The fossils, which were discovered by Prof. Hublin in 2004 only to come to the fore after 13 years, put Darwinists in a great dilemma. Although many evolutionists who were troubled by the rebuttal of evolution scenario tried to deny these fossils and come up with new scenarios, all the obtained scientific data clearly shows that mankind did not evolve.

The only finding that carries any evidential value for evolution is the revelation of "transitional forms". To date, all the layers of the stratum have been reached and more than 700 million fossils have been acquired. Yet all of these fossils belong to species that are intact and complete. A species discovered among the ancient layers emerged suddenly, remained unchanged throughout eons, and either has survived until today or perished to become extinct, but transitional forms have yet to be encountered among the myriad fossils.

Had life forms evolved through gradual changes as evolutionists claim, there should have been countless transitional fossils lying within the earth's strata, and better yet, transitional forms should have been encountered even more frequently. The absence of transitional forms in the fossil record completely shatters the notion of evolution. The oldest human fossils dating back 350,000 years discovered in the excavation attest to not evolution but creation.