Welcome to the Power Hour
Today I will be talking about the proof of evolution dealing with monkey to man.
The first to discuss is 'Ramapithecus'. His shape; length of arms and legs, head, height, amount of hair, etc. has been shown in detail in drawings concerning him. What evidence do they have? A piece of a jawbone about two inches long. What more proof do you need?
Australopitecus is the next on our list. His skull was found but the brain case and skull form is distinctly ape. The name even means 'southern ape.' The reason that this was even used is because there were tools found nearby. If that doesn't prove that it was an ape-man, what would? Richard Leakey has even removed Australopitecus from the chart in his book, 'Origins.'
Donald Johanson discovered some bones in Africa. They were shown in National Geographic magazine in December of 1976. These bones have come to be known as Lucy and they are no different than the bone structure of modern chimpanzees that walk upright. Once again, this proof that we came from monkeys is getting more and more unbelievable.
Next on the list is 'Homo habilis'. This skull was found by Richard Leakey, the leading expert regarding prehistoric man. After the skull was found, Leakey had this to say in the June, 1973 National Geographic, "Either we toss out this skull or we toss out our theories of early man."
THIS IS THE REASON WHY:
Leakey said that the skull was 2.8 million years old yet it was of man's genus. It was more man- like than other supposed ape-men on the chart yet it was two million years older than some of them were. So how could it be? Leakey knew this so his solution is "toss out this skull or toss out our theories of early man." He also made this comment: "it leaves in ruins the notion that all early fossils can be arranged in an orderly sequence of evolutionary change." (1)
Homo erectus is the bones of supposedly the oldest nearly human remains on earth. This classification is based on two fossil finds: "Peking Man" and "Java Man" Let's look at them. Peking Man will be first. "In 1921, two molar teeth were found in a limestone hill 25 miles from Peking, China. Six years later, a third tooth was found and given to Dr. David Black. Over the next several years dozens of pieces of broken up skulls were found. Some time after 1936, a man named Franz Weidenreich, who was in charge of the dig, fashioned a model of what "Peking Man" supposedly looked like."
World War Two comes along and all of the fragments were lost except for the two teeth. But before the war, "a French scientist, Marcellin Boule, examined the actual fragments of the skull and in 1937 published his findings. He said that the fragments were definitely monkey-like, that the model did not correspond objectively to the fossils. The date of Peking man was supposedly in the neighborhood of half a million years. Human fossils have been dug up from the same area."(2)
Let's look at 'Java Man". This one will make you want to go out and get some 'Espresso'.
"In 1891 a Dutch physician named Eugene Dubois discovered 'Java Man.' Well, what he really found was an ape-like skullcap.
A few years later he returned to the site along the Solo River and found a human leg bone and two molar teeth 50 feet away from the first find.
Like a good scientist, Dubois put the head bone together with the leg bone and called it 'Java Man.' Expert evolutionists have ingeniously estimated the age of the find to be 500,000 years old." (3)
Some concluding remarks on 'Java Man'. Dubois admitted before he died that he found two truly human skulls near the place that he found the other fragments. He also said that 'Java Man' was, in reality, a giant gibbon.
What man will do so that he doesn't have to show accountability, responsibility to a Creator. He chooses to believe that he came from a monkey even though the evidence is clearly against it. To show what depths that depraved, Godless men will go to fool the public, let's look at "Cro-Magnon Man" and "Neanderthal Man". As we look at these we will see that they are as human as we are.
Cro-Magnon Man (12,000 to 30,000 years ago) was found in a cave by some boys out running with their dog. He fell into a crack in the ground. The boys went into the cave, it was several hundred feet long. There were colorful pictures on the wall of deer, horses, and bison. "The paintings are now famous as the skillful artwork of people we call Cro-Magnon. Some of their skeletons were found buried in another cave at "Les Eyzies" ("les a he"), France in 1868. Smithsonian magazine (October 1986) carried an article titled" "Cro-Magnon hunters were really us, working our strategies for survival".(4)
I was reading another article on this one and they said that if you put a suit and tie on them, you probably would not know them from any of us.
Neanderthal Man is the next on our list. An interesting fellow, his name even sounds super primitive. "The name comes from the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany. It was here in 1856 that the first skeleton of Neathderthal Man was discovered. Since then there have been many Neanderthal graves found in Europe and the Middle East... During the late nineteenth century, with Darwin's theory shaking the scientific world, these early 'ape-men' were 'proof' that human evolution was a fact"(5)
They were shown as bent over, club swinging cave men and the reason being is that the one skeletal find was a person severely deformed by age and arthritis. His brain was larger than an average man's today. Oh no! Evolution going the wrong way and that is basically what Creation is. Creation teaches that things get worse as time goes on, not better and it is because of sin. It's the law of thermodynamics, things break down and die or rot or whatever.
There are new theories of evolution going around and the dates on the present theory of evolution are different by a few thousand or million or billion of years in different books written by different evolutionists. Differences abound but what difference does it make?
SO, IS EVOLUTION SCIENTIFIC?
"In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit in with it."
H.S. Lipson, FRS (Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, UK), 'A physicist looks at evolution'. Physics Bulletin, vol. 31, 1980, p. 138.
IS IT A FACT? OR A FAITH?
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory - is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof."
L. Harrison Matthews, FRS, Introduction to Darwin's The Origin of Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, p.xi.
"One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written."
Hubert P. Yockey (Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, USA), 'A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogensis by information theory"". Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 67, 1977, . 396.
WHAT DO THE FACTS PROVE?
"Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to contradict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants."
Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia), 1980 Assembly Week Address.
Comment: It is so easy to see a conspiracy behind all of the things happening whether in the area of evolution/creation, so-called free sex, gun control, free speech, etc.
WHAT DO THE FACTS SAY?
'Facts do not "speak for themselves"; they are read in the light of theory. Creative thought, in science as much as in the arts, is the motor of changing opinion. Science is a quint-es-sentially human activity, not a mechanized, robotlike accumulation of objective information, leading by laws of logic to inescapable interpretation.'
Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), 'The validation of continental drift' in his book Ever since Darwin, Burnett Books, 1978 pp. 161-162.
Worded another way, he is saying that the facts are no more important than the interpretation of the facts, so to speak.
Even Pastor Darwin said it this way,
"For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question: and this is here impossible."
Charles Darwin, 1859, Introduction to Origin of Species, p. 2. Also quoted in "John Lofton's Journal". The Washington Times, 8 February 1984.
We are all bias, it is just according to what bias we are bias with.
In conclusion, as one Christian brother who is a scientist says, "The missing links are and will remain missing because they were never there to be found." That is in regards to the evolution of monkey to man. But I say that there IS a missing link in man.
The true missing link is a Saviour missing in our hearts. He came in human flesh approx. 2,000 years ago. He created you and he wants you to know him in a personal way. He desires to give you life for all eternity. So turn from sin, confess it now. He'll give you strength and this is how. Submit to him, give him your life. He'll give you the best advice. Jesus is his name! Receive him now. He loves you! If I may talk to you, give me a call or write me!
(1) Unlocking the Mysteries Of Creation Vol. 1-- Dennis R. Peterson, B.S. M.A.
(2) Evolution: The Fossils Say No-- Dr. Duane Gish, B.S, .Ph.D.
(3) Unlocking the Mysteries Of Creation Vol. 1-- Dennis R. Peterson, B.S. M.A.
(4) IBID
(5) IBID
AND here I hit it from a little different perspective using some of the same notes and some new ones too and a slide presentation.
Go to Monkey Man video
Return to Cults and Christian Box
OR