August 20, 2012 | David F. Coppedge

Human Evolution Puzzles & Problems

Recent stories on human evolution continue to illustrate ongoing problems that overturn long-held beliefs.

To hybridize or not to hybridize:  Some paleoanthropologists are now challenging the recently-announced claim that modern humans interbred with Neanderthals, but the proponents of hybridization are standing their ground; see original paper in PNAS (August 14, 2012, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1200567109) and news summaries on Live Science (with artwork of intelligent-looking Neanderthal), PhysOrg (with artwork of dumb-looking Neanderthal), and the BBC News (with artwork of painted Neanderthal).  The debate does not appear settled.  A two-minute video clip in the BBC article contains fascinating facts about the human genome, except for a mistaken reference to “junk DNA.”

Older culture:  Evidence for culture 44,000 years old was announced by the BBC News – a problem since that date is nearly twice the previous date for earliest human culture.  Of special note in the article is this statement:

These new discoveries, however, resemble modern day tools used by San hunter-gatherers so clearly as to remove any doubt as to their purpose.

“You can hold [one of the] ancient artefacts in your left hand and a modern artefact in your right and they’re exactly the same. It’s incredible… the functions are very, very clear,” Dr Backwell told the BBC.

Tales of the teeth:  Chinese and French scientists have dated “hominin” teeth from a cave with unprecedented precision to 1.8 million years, a story on PhysOrg claims.  Unfortunately, a jaw fragment from the Longgupo cave was initially ascribed in 1991 to Homo erectus, but has now been shown to be “indistinguishable from Late Miocene-Pliocene Chinese apes of the genus Lufengpithecus” (Gigantopithecus), the article mentioned.  How, then, did numerous stone-tool artifacts made by humans get in the cave?  The claimed “consistent” dates should be interpreted in light of the blockquote from the 8/17/2012 entry under “Getting the dates right”).  Researchers appear baffled by an anomaly: “We observed an inverse correlation of two samples with the stratigraphical sequence,” they said, aware that correct interpretation of the cave has implications for leading theories about the location where the first humans supposedly evolved.

Changing the dates again:  It’s been well known in paleoanthropology circles that molecular evidence and fossil evidence for the assumed divergence time of apes and humans don’t match.  The heck with fossils, then, implied Kevin Langergraber (Boston U); in a new PNAS paper (August 13, 2012, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211740109).  His team went with molecular markers of living chimpanzees and apes to divine the average generation time of ancient apes he never saw.  He came up with an estimate of 19-25 years – longer than thought.  With this information he pushed back the age of the ape-human divergence from 6 million years to 7 or 8 million years, but the age of divergence of gorillas and chimps from 8 to 17 million years ago.  Science Now and PhysOrg published this inference without criticism.  Science Now ended with this pregnant clause giving cause for pause: “While these precise dates for both generation times and the split between lineages may be modified as more data is collected from more apes, adds evolutionary biologist Wen-Hsiung Li of the University of Chicago, the new work is significant because it ‘provides a novel approach to the long-standing issue of the divergence time between human and chimp.‘”

Take two – or is that 153?  In “Remaking history: A new take on how evolution has shaped modern Europeans,”  PhysOrg unwittingly let the cat out of the bag about the trustworthiness of previous claims.  Watch for the operative phrase “than previously thought” in the opening summary, a phrase suggesting falsification:

Investigators reporting in the Cell Press journal Trends in Genetics say that new analytical techniques are changing long-held, simplistic views about the evolutionary history of humans in Europe. Their findings indicate that many cultural, climatic, and demographic events have shaped genetic variation among modern-day European populations and that the variety of those mechanisms is more diverse than previously thought.

The next paragraph was more optimistic, claiming that a new study published in Trends in Genetics provides “never-before-seen glimpses into the complex evolution of humans in Europe, helping researchers piece together the events that ultimately created what is now known as modern man.”  So, what are these glimpses and pieces?  First, the reader must wade through the standard tale.  Then comes the overturn: “For some decades, it was assumed that the genetic diversity of contemporary Europeans was shaped mainly during the Neolithic transition; however, it now appears that it was also affected both before and after this key event.”  But if that is true, it scrambles the data, making any theory incoherent.

The remainder of the article consisted of promises that future multidisciplinary research might “allow us to obtain a much more accurate and detailed perspective on the nature and timing of major prehistoric processes,” implying that the perspective up to now has been inaccurate and lacking detail.  One researcher acknowledged, “The development of inter-disciplinary approaches is crucial to elaborate realistic models of human evolution,”  implying that current models are unrealistic to some unstated degree.

“Realistic models of human evolution” – how’s that for an oxymoron.  “To dream the impossible dream….”

These stories lead to an inescapable conclusion: the promoters of “human evolution” theories are charlatans.  Who but a charlatan promotes ideas that are inaccurate, lacking detail, unrealistic, imprecise, incredible, baffling, backwards, constantly changing, and destructive to their long-held ideas.  Why should we give these charlatans any credence?  Don’t be distracted by their skill in using instruments and math.  That is IRRELEVANT to the major point: explaining where humans came from.  If an astrologer or alchemist was so gifted, would that validate his claims?  Absolutely not.  We know these charlatans are completely untrustworthy because they change their stories constantly.  There is hardly any portion of their scenario that survives from what was taught in textbooks for years, decades, or 153 years ago when Charlie D. first suggested that humans could trace our ancestry to animals. The only constant is the overarching BELIEF in evolution.  They practice divination, ever searching for “glimpses” and “pieces” to rationalize their prior commitment.

Every discovery in paleoanthropology overturns what was previously thought.  Scan through the “Early Man” links in these pages to see that has been the norm for 12 years of our reporting.  They consistently fail to reveal that the only ones who “previously thought” these things were their fellow evolutionary charlatans.  Sensible people never would think such silly notions.  We know they are silly, too: the idea that mistakes in ape brains led to what was described in the 8/18/2012 entry, a human brain with a cleaning crew, a switchboard operator, billions of neurons each as unique as a snowflake, a mind and the power of rational thought.  Who would ever think that but a committed atheist materialist who has no other option than the Darwin myth?  Absurdity, implausibility, contradiction – ANYTHING but creation!  How they ever convinced so many people they were practicing “science” has to count as one of the biggest swindles in history.

Look at another example of silliness: the paleoanthropologist who couldn’t see what his own hands were telling him: he held a tool in one hand and claimed it was 44,000 years old, then held a modern tool made by a living hunter-gatherer in his other hand and found them identical.  This means he believes that intelligent humans never progressed for at least 6 times the length of all recorded human history before they finally figured out how to plant a farm, ride a horse, or build a city.  In the Biblical record, humans were doing all of that in the first generation.

The paleoanthropology mythmakers have a very low opinion of the common sense of their ancestors and their fellow human beings – which leads to another inescapable conclusion, that they suffer from delusions of grandeur about their own intellects.  Pay them no mind.  Pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of eudaimonia (the ideal good life founded on duty, responsibility and rationality) endowed by your Creator.  Just don’t let the charlatans poison the minds of the young; inoculate them with sound reasoning before they are exposed.  Evolutionists would never come up with one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all; they would only weaken and sicken it.  A healthy society begins with a healthy worldview.


1 Trackback

Leave a Reply