How the Missing Links are Still Missing

By Jeremias Wells   
January 07, 2010
Where is the Scientific Proof for Evolution?
Discovery of Fraud: The Piltdown Man
Australopithecus -- No Proof for Ape-Man Link
Neanderthal Man -- Another Deception
Java Man -- Yet Another Falsehood
Peking Man -- More Deception

Marx
Karl Marx: "Darwin's work is most important and suits my purpose."
Why Atheists Like Evolution


The story of creation provides us with the necessary information on the origin of man – the starting point for any history of mankind. Unfortunately, history textbooks, magazine articles, and those familiar, glossy, well-illustrated volumes put out by a number of popular publishing houses with wide distribution tell a vastly different story than that which Moses related in the book of Genesis. In order to explain away the necessity of thanking God for our existence, redemption, and preservation, the materialists of our world have invented a false system based on the absurd mental meanderings of the medical school dropout and naturalist Charles Darwin, a false system called the Theory of Evolution. This theory states that non-living matter gave life to itself. The resulting little bits of mindless jelly then evolved into fish. Some fish climbed onto land and became amphibians, which either grew feathers and flew or developed hair and eventually became monkeys. At the end of this chain of impossible transformations we reach the origin of man.

Darwin's theories became a valuable part of an atheistic movement best described as naturalism which claims that nature is the source of all that exists and not God. The value of all these ideas, though hardly original, was recognized by others in the battle against Christianity during the late nineteenth century. Coinciding with the rise of Marxism, the Theory of Evolution was promoted by many well-known atheists and declared enemies of Christian civilization. In fact, evolutionism became one of the basic tenets of communism. In October, 1978, Prof. Plinio Correa de Oliveira wrote, “The atheistic, materialistic, and evolutionist principles that for the depths of communism contrast totally with the belief in one God, pure spirit, most perfect, omnipotent, and eternal, and in Jesus Christ, the God-man which forms the sublime apex of the Catholic religion.” See TFP Newsletter, 1979, no. 2.
It is easy to understand Karl Marx's satisfaction on reading Darwin's book The Origin of Species. In a letter of January 16, 1861 to socialist leader Ferdinand Lassale, Marx wrote: "Darwin's work is most important and suits my purpose in that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class stuggle. One does, of course, have to put up with the clumsy English style of argument. Despite all shortcomings, it is here that, for the first time, 'teleology' in natural science is not only dealt a mortal blow but its rational meaning is empirically explained." Source: MECW, Volume 41, p. 245; first published in F. Lassalle, Nachgelassene Briefe und Schriften, Stuttgart, 1922, MIA: Marxist Writers: Marx & Engels: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/letters/61_01_16.htm


Where Is the Scientific Proof?

From the outset, let it be understood that there is no sound scientific foundation for Darwin’s wild speculations. Although several sciences have been consulted to provide proof, the only direct evidence acceptable would be the discovery of fossil remains of some intermediate creature between one species and another.

Evolutionists have been digging up the ground throughout the world for decades looking for skeletal remains or imprints in sedimentary rock. If living things evolved step by step, there should be millions of halfway creatures. None have been found, although several have been manufactured in the monkey field. Actually, the fossil record shows exactly the opposite: All the varied species that have existed on earth appear suddenly, fully formed and developed, which, of course, is consistent with the creation of Genesis.

Discovery of Fraud and Deceit: Piltdown Man

In 1912 two scientists announced that they had discovered the "missing link" in a gravel pit in Piltdown, England. This consisted of a human skull missing the face and the jawbone of an ape having the teeth worn like human teeth. The age of his find was estimated at 500,000 years. Some experts, like the great French authority on paleontology, Marcellin Boule, refused to accept it because of the impossible combination of a human skull and ape-like jawbone. Nevertheless, the world, eager for any link in the evolution of man, applauded the discovery.

For forty years the evolutionist school used the Piltdown bones to prove that mankind came not from God but from a tree-swinging ape. However, in the early fifties, as suspicions of a forgery increased, the evolutionists themselves submitted the specimen to rigorous tests, hoping to lessen their disgrace. The tests revealed that the bones belonged to different creatures. The skull was human, a thousand years old; the jaw was from an orangutan that had died within a year of the discovery. Its teeth had been filed down to appear human. This monstrous hoax inflicted enormous damage during the years when it held center stage.

The remaining sparse evidence can be reduced to three groups:

1) Australopithecus, near ape;
2) Java man and Peking man, half and half;
3) Neanderthal man, near human.

In order to disguise the unreliability of the evidence, imaginative artists have been employed to flesh out the empty bones of these creatures and place them in the human family tree, nicely progressing from one false position to the next.

Australopithecus

Evolutionists have recovered the skeletal remains of several extinct apes in southern Africa that differ slightly from their modern counterparts. The scientists have naturally concluded that the differences provide evidence that the ancient apes were preparing to change into men. However, careful study by well known anatomists have proved that these once promising links are nothing more than extinct apes. Gish, op. cit., p. 120. The two scientists were Lord Zuckerman, a famous British anatomist, and Dr. Charles Oxnard, a professor at the University of Chicago.

Neanderthal Man

At the most recent end of the time scale, we come to the Neanderthal Man. Placing him among the intermediate specimens gives us a typical example of the deceitful practices employed by the frustrated evolutionists. He belongs more to the field of anthropology, for he is 100% human, although of a distinctly different race. Because he lived immediately before Noah’s flood and was most likely destroyed by it, archaeologists have uncovered numerous specimens. With an embarrassing lack of exhibits elsewhere, these scientists felt the need of exploiting their find to its limits. Noticing the heavy brow ridges, they brought in their ever faithful artists and unfairly portrayed this unfortunate creature as a pre-human brute. In any event, diggers have uncovered modern man (sometimes termed Cro-Magnon man) in levels underneath the Neanderthal, which obviously turns the family tree upside down.

Java Man

The proof that we have descended from monkey ancestors has now been reduced to two, Java Man and Peking Man. Let us see how reliable they are.

A Dutch physician, Eugene Dubois, discovered the Java Man fossils in 1891. These consisted of two ape-like teeth, one skullcap with the brain case missing (and therefore impossible to determine which category it belonged to), and one human thigh bone, found fifty feet away. Without any justification, he claimed that this meager collection of bones was from the same individual and called it Pithecanthropus-Java Man. As with the Piltdown Man, he estimated the age to be about 500,000 years and, again as with the Piltdown Man, there was fraud involved, because the doctor concealed the fact that he also discovered two human skulls at the site.

Dr. Dubois revealed the human skulls in 1921, and seventeen years later he announced his conclusion that the Java Man was a gibbon. But it was too late; the Java Man was firmly enthroned in the pantheon of missing links.

peking man
Peking Man
Peking Man


As presented here, and in reality, the man-from-ape-theory by the discovery of intermediate creatures rests with the Peking Man. If he collapses, the whole theory goes down with him. Many atheist scientists who favor the Theory of Evolution for philosophical reasons, that is they refuse to believe in God, are willing to discard the specimens mentioned above as insufficient, but they still cling to the Peking Man as justification. Yet he too is a fraud. He simply does not exist as something halfway between ape and man, nor did he ever.

With the Java and Piltdown frauds at the height of their influence, Dr. Davidson Black, a professor of anatomy in Peking, in 1926 added to the growing list of evidence – one tooth – and called it the Peking Man (Sinanthropus Pekinensis).  After he received a substantial sum of money from the Rockefeller Foundation, Black began to excavate a large landslide at a hill where the tooth was found. Sifting through debris of ashes and bones of numerous mammals, he collected some thirty monkey-like skulls along with some more teeth and a couple of jawbones, but no other parts of the anatomy. Black announced he had found many fossils to prove the evolution of man.

Among the few scientists invented to inspect the site was above mentioned French expert, Marcellin Boule, himself an evolutionist. Totally irritated at having his time wasted, he identified the skulls as belonging to baboons and macaques. Since each skull had a hole bashed in the rear, Boule declared that they were the remains of food eaten by human workmen. Noting the large amount of burned debris, Boule reported the human beings operated industrial furnaces to convert limestone into lime.

This was confirmed when the skeletal remains of ten humans were located in the same are as the bashed-in-skulls, most likely victims of the landslide. Largely ignored in most accounts, the presence of human remains mixed in with the monkeys certainly presents a severe obstacle to any belief in this whole business.

During the excavation, Black, and later his successor, sculpted artificial models showing creatures midway between ape and man. According to three eyewitnesses, including Boule, who kept notes of their observations, these fake carvings bore no resemblance to the actual fossils. The obvious question is, "Why don't we just examine the skulls and get on with it?" Well you see, we cannot do that; all the evidence mysteriously disappeared at the end of World War II. All that is left are two teeth and the ever present artificial models.

  • Have you ever been told that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is true?
  • Tell us about it: [email protected]

 

Comments  

 
-9 # Hans-Georg Lundahl 2010-06-22 11:50
When I was younger I considered Peking man and such evidence of folklore's trolls and goblins.

Well, at least Flores man leaves us hobbits ... misdated to 20.000 years ago.

Do click link to my creationist site if you want to!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+2 # Herbert Seel 2010-12-22 11:02
I believe that it should be noted that the supposed ape-man Neanderthal started showing up in graves with advanced stone tools, clothing and amulets along with flowers. suggesting that Neanderthal was not the knuckle dragging grunting brute that was pictured on the wall of my 6th grade classroom in '67 but actually a full fledged man. He was capable of making clothes and tools and weapons and even had a belief system. Which suggests complicated abstract thought and a developed language with which to relay these thoughts and beliefs to others. Now not only do they admit that neanderthal coexisted with "cromagnon" but they even suggest that the two may have interbred. I guess neanderthal was a real man after all. I used to be an evolutionist and hung on every word that came from the Leakey's and the olduvai gorge. But too many lies and half truths ruined the fantasy for me. Then I became a Catholic.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
-2 # Rich Keys 2011-06-07 12:04
If evolution truly occurred randomly, where are the "Fossils of Failure"? Where are the bones of an early creature who developed a leg, but it had no knee or foot, or later a foot but not all the sophiscated bones in the foot? Where is the fossil remains of a creature who first developed a head, but had no openings for the eyes, mouth, ears, and nose? Surely the intricate workings of the eyes, spinal cord and brain developed at a much later time.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+3 # Okpala David 2011-06-28 17:27
I would suggest that people be made to know that scientific truths are not infallible truths. They are rather reasonable assumptions based on certain observations made.That is why scientific theories change from time to time based on new observations, telling you that science is not very 'scientific' as average people generally believe and attack religion as being stupid.Therefore religion and science and in fact everything, are all based on beliefs. Every theory is standing on a particular assumption either immediate or remote and if the assumption happens not to be true you know what it means.Therefore people should stop swallowing everything because they have been decorated with the term 'scientifically' proven. Science is a fallible speculation and not a perfection.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
-6 # Martin 2011-08-24 03:41
The fact that humans had to invent airplanes and cars is contradictory to macro evolution. If macro evolution were true, humans today should have wings.
Traffic jams and other problems should have triggered the development of wings in humans. But no.

Also, if evolution were true, humans should be able to run at least as fast as
other animals, to survive from attacks of fierce animals during the last "Billion years". But why humans run much slower ?
Isn't the ability to run very fast more important from the perspective of survival than the ability to compose poetry, or the ability of painting,
or the sense of beauty ??

Theory of (macro) evolution will be remembered not as a great theory but
as a GREAT JOKE !
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+15 # Greta 2013-02-05 15:52
IS the ability to run fast the most important for survival? If that were true, one would think that the cheetah, the fastest land animal, would be most populous. Instead, it's uncommon and getting scarcer.
Humans aren't strong or agile in comparison to most other mammals, but they don't need to be. They have large brains, capable of thinking through complex solutions to difficult problems like "How do I avoid a predator that is faster than me?" They use tools extensively to compensate for their shortcomings - how about bicycles or cars for speed? (Or helicopters and subways, to solve your traffic jam problem?) If an organism can solve all its basic survival problems without massive changes to their body, then it will do so because frankly, it's much faster and easier.
Beauty? Poetry? After you've learned to survive comfortably, you have leisure time to do anything you want. Heck, you can even read articles on the internet and comment on them in your free time!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+5 # facts 2012-01-19 04:05
Right lets get a few things sorted first for fossils to form and remain intact the remains must be perfectly persevered and undisturbed for thousands of year. As we all know from basic science that the earth was once a giant landmass. As the continetal plates began to brake up seismic activity is occurring hence disturbing the remains and destroying the fossils hence the missing links. As well most of these fossils have become more commonly know as oil.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
-3 # Bernadette 2012-01-24 05:49
@ facts:
'As we all know from basic science that the earth was once a giant landmass.
' This has not been scientifically proven. This is however a scientific theory (closely related to the Evolution theory), with the best evidence cited being ecological evidence.
This evidence 'proves' that certain landmasses had to be at the equator at one time or another to justify the existence of the tropical plant remains found on these landmasses. One example is fossilised tropical ferns found in the south of Holland.
This is not inconclusive proof that Holland had ever been near the equator; recent climate studies have shown that the average temperature worldwide was 13 degrees Celsius higher in the 12th/13th century A.D. than now. If this was the case I can invision a time when the climate in The Netherlands would allow tropical ferns to grow with Holland being in its current position rather than hovering near the equator.
This weakens the large landmass theory.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
-1 # Bernadette 2012-01-24 05:52
@ facts:
Continuation of previous post.
Even if the Earth was one large landmass and was broken up by seismic activity which hypothetically destroyed all evidence of evolution; why did the dinosaur fossils (which are supposedly older than any humanoid fossils) survive in such numbers whilst the humanoid fossils did not?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+5 # Bernadette 2012-01-24 06:02
Sorry to keep harping on, but since this article addresses scientific hoaxes concerning pre-historic man I thought I'd share an anecdote my proffessor of Neolithic studies told us in a lecture (I am an archaeology student by the way).

We were told not to list Leakey as a source in our essays. Apparently, when he handed over the Olduvai gorge excavations to his succesor the dig had to be called off. Not because of any African unrest, but because all subsequent finds turned out to be fakes. There is no telling now what is real or fake in the Rift Valley.

Of course, this was never mentioned in the National Geographic (which had up untill then reported on every find ever made in that place).

My proffessor (a confirmed atheist) said that was because they did not want to bring attention to the fact that National Geographic had given their top scientific award to a con (his words, not mine).
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment

Comments will be approved by a moderator before appearing on the site. Any comments that contain inappropriate language or content will not be posted. Your email is required but will not be made public.


Security code
Refresh