When contemplating this theory I believe the inquirer must first of all ask themselves what is their motivation in seeking an answer for this question.
Do you have a vested interest in wanting just the facts or is their a bias or prejudice when peering backwards through the ages of time? Perhaps you might ask your self what am I really hoping to find at the end of my quest for truth.
If you honestly and sincerely make a fair approach to this solution then you will be shocked to find out that scientific inquiry has very little to do with the basis of this theory as this ideology has only a thin shell like veneer that has the appearance of substance but in reality only contains hollow assertions to the realm of science and in essence it is projected to be more like a sci-fi program.
What you may not understand is that these so called scientists have an agenda based on their presuppositions which have them searching for selective answers in employing any type of scientific method towards the gathering and explanation of the data. Their goal can be summarized as supporting an atheistic worldview that is devoid of God and they are committed to manipulate and control the evidence to support their truth claims which makes it more of a philosophy and a religion than a bona fide science.
They can publish something in a journal or a textbook or put it on the television as being factual and they can embellish the content with the aid of professional artists who through imagination and creation can exhibit an impressive display of magical awe. The proponents of this philosophy can present their case professionally through the credentials of parading Phd’s behinds the scenes of these archaeological discoveries and present themselves with elaborate commentary and impressive footage so convincing that it captivates the audience to have enough faith in their scientific community in which to believe. Yet this is no more than a propaganda scheme which has been preached from the pulpits of academia in order to gain converts.
You might be thinking that you are not qualified to differentiate between truth or fiction on these matters and yet we make all kinds of distinctions and personal decisions without the assistance of others? If anything lets hold these scientists accountable for their information as we do our politicians and other sectors of society. Perhaps you have thought well these are intelligent and educated people who are passionate about their beliefs and committed to their fields of studies and yet that can describe any group of people that is dedicated to a cause whether right or wrong and yet we forget to realize that there have been people that have been so easily deceived over the course of world history by the experts of their times.
Also sometimes we are gullible because it supports something that we want to believe or that we find attractive such as a naturalistic position versus a theistic world view. This is because we want to be alone in the universe as being our own god in charge of our own destiny without considering a hierarchal being that may threaten our state of existence.
This may be one of the reasons why we are so easily indoctrinated by these gurus of science.
Perhaps the determining factor really comes down in this debate as being a matter of a moral choice versus an intellectual endeavor when dealing with the aspects of how one weighs the evidence or should I say lack of evidence in question.
When you actually look at the scientific data and the hoaxes that have been presented in this field it should make the individual skeptical of anything they want to link as being evolutionary.
To begin with we have had more technological advances in this era of the scientific age and yet we have failed to produce all of the intermediary life forms that were said to of existed in order to account for life. This also applies to the anthropologists who have been negligent in providing sustainable evidence to support its theoretical claims that we have evolved from a molecule to a man. Evolutionists can’t even prove the evolution of man within the so called family of beings let alone trace our ancestry back to the primordial ooze of some single cell amoeba.
For instance the jawbone of Ramapithecus has been debated extensively among scientists who are not conclusive over this specimen.
Then there is the Piltdown man which turned out be a hoax in 1953 as they obtained filed teeth and bone that was stained in order to make it appear ancient.
The Nebraska man was fabricated by a single tooth that was found in 1922. A few years later they found the skull that matched the empty socket for the tooth only to find out that it had originated from a pig.
Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man are believed by some evolutionists to be normal European “Homo sapiens”
Yet another example is the Peking man whose bones can no longer be located which is pretty remarkable for such an important find but suspiciously one of the men who helped to find Peking Man was one of the individuals that was also involved in the Piltdown man hoax.
Then there is Java Man who was found by Dr. Eugene Dubois who claimed him to be that of homo erectus and yet at the end of his life he recanted his statement in which he differentiated the pieces by ascribing the leg bone to homo sapiens while the skullcap to be that of a giant ape or gibbon and therefore he discredited his own claim as being one of our ancient family members.
The Heidelberg man is a single fossil which consists of a lower jaw with teeth and the finding on these skeletal remains still remains elusive.
Another find is the composite skeleton of Lucy which had been assembled from various finds in the vicinity but not in the same immediate location and likewise it has not been conclusively identified either.
Actually there has not been enough pieces of so called fossilized man to fill a shallow grave. In the final summary these skeletal remains are either identified as primate or human not in between.
These evolutionists may have purported to have found a workable model to perpetrate a science of philosophy which is really centered on disproving the ideology of intelligent design in lieu of their religion of Atheism.
Also when looking at the differences between primates and man there are 31 major differences that are irreconcilable. For instance,the ape has a great toe in which it uses like a thumb for grasping and it is vastly different from the great toe of mankind. Yet without this feature it would have been impossible for their to have been an evolutionary step due to its inability to be able to survive without this essential function of the great toe and due to the process of the survival of the fittest it would not have proliferated itself to future generations. In addition to this there has never been any tangible evidence found to substantiate this claim concerning the mutation of a migrating toe.
Another example would be the head placement between a man and primate which are different. Our heads are balanced on top of the spinal column for the sake of walking or running in the upright position and their heads are hinged in front of the spinal column for ease of movement upon all fours. Again no evidence has ever been found to support this transitional phase and yet in just one evolutionary move this would not allow for the survival of the species.
One more point is that the babies of primates are different from humans as the primates after they are born are able to be somewhat independent as they are able to run and climb onto their mothers back while the human child is completely helpless. This one would really take a leap of faith in believing that this devolutionary process would contribute somehow to its survival but rather the concept of natural selection would lead to the extinction of such inferior earthly accidents.
Also what are the chances for a set of ape parents to produce dizygotic twins (male and female) which could survive as the first non-ape human babies and then reproduce offspring of their own in continuing the reproduction cycle.
Some other things to consider in what has been proposed as a apart of debunking the evolutionary myth is that according to the evolutionists mankind has somehow existed on earth for a million years. This of course would create an over population of the human race by theoretically putting the population at 10 to the 5000th power by 1970 which is a number that this world could not even sustain.
Even if you add in wars, plagues, and famines this would still not be enough to account for lower numbers of humans as even in our modern times of globalization and industrialization we continue to be more destructive in regards to the human race in finding more sophisticated means of dealing a death blow to whole populations with the spread of disease and the continuity of warfare which has led this last century to be one of the bloodiest and epidemic of all times.
Sure we have made giant leaps in technological advances in preserving life but this is countered in limiting life likewise by birth control, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia.
Also if population control has been managed by these mass extinctions over the course of human history then where is the fossil evidence concerning these massive graves of people that have died out.
The reality is that the fossil evidence isn’t there because the mankind hasn’t been a resident on the planet for that long and based on some statistical models the present world population supports more of a biblical model of creation of thousands of years versus the hypothetical evolutionist model of a million.
Lastly the sign of a master designer tends to emerge in creating and sustaining the gene pool of man as we depend upon external forces that are beyond our ability to control such as what is expressed in the the Anthropic Principle where it takes exactly the right amount of oxygen, carbon dioxide, sunlight, magnetic field, speed of rotation and revolution of the earth, distance from the moon, distance from the sun, ozone, water, gravity, etc. which have to be in the correct amount at the right times and places and in exact relationships in order to sustain human life.
I think in the final analysis that the evolutionists would like to find another model to hide behind because of the nakedness of their bare bones of evolutionary theory which has failed to cover up the frailty of their shame.
Atheist and Agnostic Resources
English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism
Copyright Permission by “The Evolution of a Creationist” by Dr. Jobe Martin
Henry M. Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (Nutley, New Jersey: Craig Press, 1970), p.75
Shattering the Myths of Darwinism by Richard Milton, Park Street Press,
© 1992, 1997 Inner Traditions / Bear & Co.