September 17, 2018 | David F. Coppedge

Darwinism Makes Human Ancestors Out to Be Morons

It’s impossible to believe our ancestors were as dumb as evolutionists make them out to be. But Darwinians must believe it.

Knowing what we know about human beings, ask if the Darwinian story is credible. In just 6,000 years of recorded history, humans went from grass shacks to the moon, computers, and supersonic flight. Darwinians, by contrast, say that nobody ever thought of a farm, a permanent dwelling, or a domesticated animal for at least 50 times as long! They believe that modern humans, as anatomically and mentally as capable as any of us, subsisted in caves as hunter-gatherers for over 300,000 years. And if you add in the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo erectus (all upright-walking tool makers with controlled use of fire, capable of long-distance migration), they stretch human history back over a million years, approaching 200 times the length of human civilization! How can anybody believe that? Our ancestors would have to be complete idiots to go that long without ever inventing anything better than stone tools. Was there no Einstein or Edison among them?

Keep this in mind as we look at the latest things that Darwinians say about human history. They have to believe all human ancestors were too stupid to farm or ride a horse, because their evolutionary timeline requires it. (Remember, Comte de Buffon in 1778 postulated an outrageously long timeline of 75,000 years for the entire history of life, which his contemporaries thought was ridiculous.) And yet today’s evolutionists (and historians) all know that civilization and agriculture literally exploded on the scene only a few thousand years ago (like the book of Genesis teaches, by the way). Let’s watch evolutionists scramble to maintain their timeline against all logic, common sense and evidence.

Wandering Stories (Current Biology). In this essay, Florian Maderspacher tells a wandering story, all right. He wanders through evolutionary timelines of early man, telling how Neanderthal DNA and Denisovan DNA has changed our understanding of our ancestors. As usual, when devising a tale, it helps to say that ‘it’s complicated.’

From the earliest analyses of mitochondrial DNA to more extensive whole-genome analyses, there is genetic evidence that all humans living outside Africa today can trace their ancestry back to a single source population that left Africa between 50 and 60 thousand years ago. This picture, simplified through the fog of history, makes for a great heroic story, as it seems to suggest that this African founder population had something special — a cognitive or cultural spark that set it apart from its ancestors and let it sweep across Earth within a few dozen millennia; but this is not the whole picture.

Recall that even 50,000 years still represents over 8 times all recorded human history. That’s a long time for anatomically modern, smart, migrating Homo sapiens (you remember, the old “Cro-Magnon Man” and such), who had already been living in Morocco 350,000 years ago in their myth (11 July 2018, 8 June 2017), decided to move to Europe and invent cave art, like the elegant drawings at Chauvet and Lascaux. But of course, in Madershacher’s “great heroic story,” these geniuses had tens of thousands of years to go before figuring out farming. Watch him explain away common sense with a “scenario” of pure speculation:

But why did humans leave Africa at the time they did? From the recent fossil finds of Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, we know that Homo sapiens — though anatomically not quite the current mark — was present in Northern Africa at least 300 thousand years ago. If the first major wave of migration really took place around 100 thousand years ago, then why the long hiatus? As with contemporary migrations, there are push or pull factors — and various mixtures thereof. Overpopulation, resource depletion or habitat degeneration might push people out of their homelands, while opportunity — the grass being greener and the antelopes more plentiful on the other side — might pull people towards new habitats. For modern humans, perhaps a fairly simple, permissive scenario is the most plausible. Like any other species, early humans were dependent on how much food they could extract from the lands they were roaming. The fatter the land, the more people it could carry, and the more likely people were to disperse.

Since he just brought up the criterion of “plausible,” ask if his account fits your standard of plausibility. Today’s humans live in all kinds of habitats, from frozen tundra to hot deserts and humid jungles. Are they feeling a “push” or “pull” to migrate and evolve? Believe it or not, Maderspacher next brings up “climate change” as a driving force behind the migration that he thinks led eventually to civilization! Yes, readers, climate change made humans what they are, even though today’s Homo sapiens live all over the earth! There’s political correctness distorting academia again.

The only way Maderspacher can defend this tale is to portray every human ancestor as completely stupid until some “cognitive or cultural spark” brought civilization. My, what was that? A lucky mutation! Oh, but if the one who got the mutation never had kids, there goes all hope for mankind down the drain. The story flies in the face of all human experience, but as a Darwinian, he has to believe it. He has to defend it. Stupid or not, he has to teach it. He knows he is safe, too, because nobody protected by the Darwin Party Police will allow outside critics to be heard laughing.

Cold climates contributed to the extinction of the Neanderthals (Northumbria University). Click the link, and watch how the Darwin worshipers at Northumbria have reproduced another version of the long-discredited “march of man” icon of evolution (10 April 2018). Ever notice how these sexists always show only naked men, but never women? Ever notice how these racists always show a progression from dark skin to light skin? (Check out Discovery Institute’s new award winning documentary, Human Zoos, recounting how evolutionists used to exhibit black people alongside apes in zoos and museums. Jerry Bergman has also written extensively about that ‘inconvenient’ racist history of Darwinism—see book image below.)

Racist and sexist illustration on Northumbria U website perpetuates known myths about human progress.

We have all seen the canonical parade of apes, each one becoming more human. We know that, as a depiction of evolution, this line-up is tosh. Yet we cling to it. Ideas of what human evolution ought to have been like still colour our debates. —Henry Gee, Nature, 5 Oct 2011

Back to this just-so story: the idea that climate change wiped out the Neanderthals is untenable and absurd on its face (they were fully human, by the way: see 27 June 2018). Evolutionists believe Neanderthals thrived for 400,000 years— an awful long time to learn how to survive anything the climate could throw at them. If it was so cold for these expert hunters who had spread all across the middle east and Europe, why didn’t they just move south? Sensible people can see how dumb this story is, but it got published in the ‘prestigious’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences anyway; why? Because it glorifies Darwin. Nobody in BS (Big Science) or BM (Big Media) has the desire (or courage) to laugh at or protest anything with the King Charles imprimatur on it, even if it is sexist and racist. Such is the power of the Darwin Party.

What REALLY happened.

DNA lives to tell the tale (Current Biology). DNA lives, for sure, and it says something, undoubtedly, but the tale told in this book review must not deviate from the Darwinian myth. Veteran anthropologist Bernard Wood is reviewing David Reich’s latest book with the pompous title, Who We Are and How We Got Here. He could have saved a lot of paper by just pointing his readers to Genesis, but that wouldn’t do: the Darwin myth must triumph!

Reich talks about “ancient DNA” that just became available in 1997 from Neanderthals, and how more and more DNA from ‘antique humans’ has been rewriting the evolutionists’ myths about early man. Finding Neanderthal DNA in living humans should have shown that all the fake sub-groups that the paleo-racists split people into have been falsified, but Darwinism is impervious to nuclear bombs, like nuclear or mitochondrial DNA. Here’s a taste of Wood’s oily story (again, ‘it’s complicated’).

Reich suggests that the reality is much more complex than the conventional wisdom that I have outlined. The picture he paints is one where regional continuity is the exception, and not the rule. For example, ancient DNA sequences from individuals only tens of thousands of years old suggest that modern humans in Europe are the result of a series of episodes through time during which contemporary populations underwent a process that recalls the churning needed to make butter.

You may now groan, “Oh, good grief.” He calls it conventional “wisdom”? Remember, he is talking about modern humans, smart and artistic and inventive people like us. To evolutionists, modern humans still had tens of thousands of years to go (multiple times all recorded history) before thinking how easy life could be with wheels, domesticated animals, farms and permanent dwellings. Evolutionists cannot have civilized man appearing too fast, because they need to stretch human evolution out to cover the 6 million years since they were apes in the trees. Without the slow-and-gradual long ages of natural selection, you see, it might look like creation. This must not be allowed to happen. The reputation of Charlie is at stake!

Individual variation in human navigation (Current Biology). This article is not about early man, but it makes a point relevant to the above discussion: namely, that people differ in their abilities. Some people (undoubtedly you know among your acquaintances) are more gifted at finding their way around than others.

The aim of this primer is to review evidence that people differ substantially in how they navigate, to examine paradigms that allow us to assess this variation, and to argue that the cognitive map debate needs to take individual differences into account. In brief, some people may form a cognitive map, and others may not.

If we grant author Nora S. Newcombe this premise, then why is it not reasonable to expect that Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo erectus types, as well as Cro-Magnons, also exhibited individual variations in their abilities? We know from experience that people vary considerably in their mental, spatial, mathematical, social, and aesthetic talents. Darwinians tend to lump all Neanderthals or Cro-Magnons (or whatever) into categories of individuals who show no variation whatsoever; they were all equally dumb. It defies all reason to expect that. Undoubtedly there were geniuses in each of these populations that could have made major breakthroughs in the alleged ten-thousands of years of their presumed existence, and would have dramatically transformed their cultures within a decade or two. People do, after all, plagiarize each other’s ideas. Why didn’t that occur, if the populations were around as long as Darwinians say they were?

On YouTube, a guy wearing shorts on the Primitive Technology Channel has gained millions of followers who are fascinated at how he can go into the Australian jungle and chop down trees, build rainproof huts, plant vegetables and live comfortably with tools he makes with his own hands, using whatever materials he finds around him. Was there no such creative person 50,000 years ago? How about 350,000 years ago? How about a million years ago? Did those mythical years even exist?

Look how quickly computer science and telecommunications arose in our day. Surely someone could have invented a mud brick, or found a way to smelt metal ore, or made a simple bridle out of vines to put on that horse over there. Evolutionists can believe that these people traveled from Africa to China, surviving off the land in all the diverse habitats and climates along the route, but never dreamed of any of these simple conveniences for tens of thousands of years — nay, for hundreds of thousands of years! – until “we” arrived with the latest mutational upgrade.

A single gene mutation may have helped humans become optimal long-distance runners ( Let’s end with a “science” news article with a headline so absurd it would be laughed off the stage if it didn’t glorify Charlie. According to King Charles, all human traits arose by chance mutations (Stuff Happens Law) and natural selection (ditto). Because of the absolute requirement that all science reporting must protect the reputation of Darwin, his disciples at the University of California, San Diego postulate that the amazing human trait of endurance running happened by mistake. Read in disbelief what got published by these Darwin worshipers in a peer-reviewed journal by the Royal Society:

Two to three million years ago, the functional loss of a single gene triggered a series of significant changes in what would eventually become the modern human species, altering everything from fertility rates to increasing cancer risk from eating red meat.

In a new paper, published in the September 12 issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine report on studies of mice engineered to lack the same gene, called CMAH, and resulting data that suggest the lost gene may also have contributed to humanity’s well-documented claim to be among the best long-distance runners in the animal kingdom.

At Evolution News & Science Today, David Klinghoffer could not accept this story, but perhaps was gentler in his critique than the tale deserves.

Folks, has it struck you what a disastrous hoax this Darwinian tale is? This is the story that rules biology today. It makes no sense, and it flies in the face of evidence, but every student is required to hear it. It is the only story schools are allowed to teach. It is the only story the journals are allowed to print. Try to criticize it—no matter how gently or discreetly—and the Darwin Party’s totalitarian bigots will destroy you. (I speak from experience.)

Look at this headline at New Scientist: “It’s an outrage that Turkey is ditching Darwin from science textbooks.” The subhead reads, “Evolution is being dropped from school biology texts in Turkey. In Hungary, academic freedoms are increasingly threatened. Time to worry, says Rachael Jolley.” It’s an outrage! DODOs: this is your call to arms! Go on the warpath! Destroy the heretics! All children must have their DOPE! Without it, they might think for themselves!

Oh, the irony. “Academic freedoms are increasingly threatened.” The most intolerant academic bigots in the world are the Darwinians.

Whether or not Turkey and Hungary have a wise policy is not the point. The Discovery Institute advises a much more accommodating policy. They want Darwinian evolution to be taught in public schools! They just want it to be taught honestly. They have consistently opposed school boards who try to require the teaching of intelligent design. It would be sufficient for them to allow teachers to show both the strengths and weaknesses of Darwinism. But no! That is forbidden! Only 100% pure, unadulterated Darwin Worship is allowed! The DODOs are in power, and they know that only DOPE produces the needed high, so that students can be molded and brainwashed to become compliant subjects of the kingdom of Darwin.

The societal consequences of Darwinism are devastating.

Darwinism is the creation myth of our time, and its propagandists will not tolerate any criticism of it. It would be tragic enough if there were no consequences, but the consequences are devastating. Some 55% to 75% of children raised in Christian homes leave the church by the time they become young adults (source), largely because they have been fed the lie that Darwinian evolution explains life and humanity. (The flip side is that few churches equip students with the weapons to fight these lies, so that students never learn the powerful evidence for Biblical creation.) These apostates go on to live without purpose, and swallow many of the other cultural lies that flow from the toxic drainpipe of ideological poison flowing out of the Darwin Industry.

In addition to that, adding insult to injury, there are more and more churches drinking the kool-aid and thinking that “theistic Darwinism” provides an acceptable scientific compromise that will keep peace with King Charles and his army. (Note: it doesn’t. The DODOs think theistic evolutionists are fools, and oppose them almost as strongly.)

Are you angry yet? This has been going on for decades! What are you doing about it?

One thing you can do is to support those who are trying to expose the lies. We do have a Donate button above, if you should choose to empower us to reach more with this important message. Whatever you do, or whomever you support, do something to expose the anti-scientific mythology of our time.

(Visited 931 times, 1 visits today)


  • Buho says:

    I wonder, in their story, what makes people 10,000 years ago different from people 20,000 years ago? Was it a “smart” mutation? If so, was it simultaneous (convergent) across the world? That would be laughable. So then, was it in one population group? That advantage would have caused them to overrun the rest of the world, but there is no record of that. But if not that, then there would be living sub-humans today, but that’s also not the case (racists having been proven wrong). Their story just doesn’t work!

Leave a Reply