finches michigan

The Descent of Man

Any person seeking an answer to the question of how living beings, including himself, came into existence, will find with two different explanations. The first is "creation," the idea that all living things came into being as a result of intelligent design. The second explanation is the theory of "evolution", which asserts that life things are not the product of intelligent design, but a cause and coincidence natural processes.
For a century and a half now, the theory of evolution has been widely supported by the scientific community. The science of biology is defined in terms of evolutionary concepts. Therefore, among the two explanations of creation and evolution, most people assume the evolutionist to be scientific. Consequently, they believe that evolution is a theory supported by the observational results of science, while creation is thought to be a faith-based belief. As a matter of fact, however, the scientific findings do not support the theory of evolution. The results of the last two decades, in particular openly contradict the basic assumptions of this theory. Many branches of science such as paleontology, biochemistry, genetics populations, comparative anatomy and biophysics, indicate that natural processes and coincidental effects can not explain life, as the theory of evolution proposes.

THE ORIGIN OF MAN

Darwin presented his claim that humans and apes descended from a common ancestor in his book The Descent of Man, published in 1871. From then until now, the followers of the path of Darwin have tried to support this claim. But despite all the research that has been carried out, the claim of "human evolution" has not been backed by concrete scientific research, especially in the field of fossils.
The man the street is largely unaware of this fact, and thinks that the claim of human evolution is supported by a lot of solid evidence. The reason for this erroneous view is that the topic is frequently discussed in the media and presented as a proven fact. But the real experts are aware that there is no scientific basis for the claim of human evolution. David Pilbeam, a paleoanthropologist at Harvard University, says:
If you brought a scientist Intelligent another discipline and showed him the meager evidence we have had no doubt say, "forget it, not enough to keep going." (( Richard E. Leakey, The Making of Humanity, Books limited sphere, Barcelona, 1982, p. 43.))
And William Fix, author of an important book on the subject of paleoanthropology, makes this comment:
As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have the audacity to say that there is "no doubt" how man originated. If only there was evidence …(( William R. Fix, bone vendors, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1984, pp. 150-153.))

This claim of evolution, which "lacks any evidence," the human family tree starts with a group of apes who have been suspected to be a gender different, the Australopithecus. According to the complaint, the Australopithecus gradually began to walk upright, his brain grew, and went through a series of stages to the current state of man (Homo sapiens). But the fossil record does not support this scenario. Despite the claim that all kinds of intermediate forms exist, there is a barrier impassable barrier between the fossil remains of humans and apes. On the other hand, has shown that species that are portrayed as the ancestors are in fact other contemporary species that lived in the same period. Ernst Mayr, one of the major proponents of the theory of evolution in the twentieth century, argues in his book A Long argument that "all puzzles [historical], such as the origin of life or of Homo sapiens, it is extremely difficult or even resist an explanation final and satisfactory. "((" Could science end to the belief of scientists who have final answers or by society's reluctance to pay the bills? "Scientific American, December 1992, p. 20.))

But what is the basis for the theory of human evolution presented by Evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to build imaginary interpretations. Throughout history, more than 6,000 species ape have lived, and most of them have become extinct. Today, only 120 species live on Earth. These 6,000 or more species of monkeys, most of whom have extinct, constitute a rich resource for the evolutionists.
On the other hand, there are considerable differences in the anatomical composition of the different human races. By Moreover, the differences were even greater between prehistoric races, because as time has passed human races have to some extent mixed with each other and reach be assimilated. However, differences remain significant among population groups living in the world today, for example, the Scandinavians, the pygmy Africa, the Inuit, the native Australians, and many others.
There is evidence that the fossils called hominid by evolutionary paleontologists in not actually belong to different species of monkey or gone to the races of humans. To put it another way, no example of a transitional form between man and apes has been found.
After these general explanations, let us now examine the hypothesis of human evolution as a whole.
The Imaginary Invalid Tree Family of Man
The Darwinist claim holds that modern man evolved from a species of ape-like creature. During this alleged evolutionary process, supposed to have started from last 4-5000000 years, it was claimed that there were some forms of "transitional" between modern man and his ancestors. According to this completely imaginary scenario, the following four basic "categories" are listed:
1. Australopithecines (any of several forms belonging to the genus Australopithecus)
2. Homo habilis
3. Homo erectus
4. Homo sapiens
Evolutionists call the genus to which the ancestors ape man suspected belonged "Australopithecus" which means "southern ape." Australopithecus, which is nothing but an old type of monkey it is extinct, is found in several different ways. Some of them are building bigger and stronger (strong), while others are smaller and delicate (Gracilis).
Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as the genus Homo, which is "man." According to the statement evolutionary, living beings in the Homo series are more developed of Australopithecus, and not very different from modern man. The modern man of today, ie the species Homo sapiens, is said to have formed in the last stage of the evolution of the genus Homo.
Fossils like "Java Man", "Man Beijing "and" Lucy ", which appear in the media from time to time and are found in publications and textbooks evolutionists, including one of the four groups mentioned above. Each of these groups also are supposed to branch into species and subspecies, as the case may be.
Some suggested transitional forms of the past, as the Ramapithecus, had to be excluded from the imaginary human family tree after it was realized that ordinary monkeys.
By outlining the links in the chain as "Australopithecines> Homo habilis> erectus> Homo sapiens, evolutionists imply that each of these types is the ancestor of the next. However, recent findings by paleoanthropologists have revealed that australopithecines, Homo habilis and Homo erectus existed in different parts of the world, at the same time. Moreover, some humans classified as Homo erectus probably lived until recently. In an article titled "Latest Homo erectus of Java: potential contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia", was reported in the journal Science that Homo erectus fossils found in Java had "mean age of 27 ± 2 to 53.3 ± 4000 years ago," and this [raise "s] the possibility that H. erectus overlapped in time with anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) in Southeast Asia "
Moreover, neandarthalensis Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens sapiens (man modern) also clearly coexisted. This situation apparently indicates the invalidity of the assertion that one is the ancestor of the other.
Intrinsically, all and scientific research findings have revealed that the fossil record does not suggest an evolutionary process as evolutionists propose. The fossils, which evolutionists claim be the ancestors of human beings, in fact belong to different human races, or more than species of apes.
What then are the human fossils and what are the apes? Is it possible for any one of them to be considered a form of transition? To find the answers, let's take a closer look to each category.

Australopithecus: a monkey species
The first category, the genus Australopithecus, means "southern ape" As we have said. It is assumed that these creatures first appeared in Africa about 4 million years, and lived until 1 million years. There are a number different species including astralopithecines. Evolutionists assume that the oldest species Australopithecus is A. afarensis. After that comes from A. africanus, A. robustus and then, which has relatively bigger bones. As for A. boisei, some researchers accept it as a different species, and others as a subspecies of A. robustus.
All of the Australopithecus species are extinct apes that resemble the apes of today. Its cranial capacity is at or below that chimpanzees today. Parts projections in the hands and feet that used to climb trees, like chimpanzees today, and his feet was built to grab hold of the branches. They are short (Maximum 130 cm. (51 inches)) and like today's chimpanzees, male Australopithecus is larger than the female. Many other features, such as details in their skulls, the closeness of their eyes, their sharp molar teeth, their jaw structure, long arms and short legs, are evidence that these creatures were no different from today's apes.
However, evolutionists claim that, although australopithecines have the anatomy of apes, unlike apes, which walked upright like humans.
This claim that australopithecines walked upright is a view that has remained paleoanthropologists as Richard Leakey and Donald C. Johanson for decades. However, many scientists who have conducted a broad front of research on the skeletal structures of australopithecines have demonstrated the invalidity of that argument. Extensive research conducted on various Australopithecus specimens by two world famous anatomists from England and the U.S., Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, has shown that these creatures walked upright on human form. Having studied the bones of these fossils for a period of 15 years by grants from the British government, Lord Zuckerman and his team of five specialists reached the conclusion that australopithecines were only an ordinary ape genus and were definitely not bipedal, although Zuckerman is an evolutionist himself. Consequently, Charles E. Oxnard, another evolutionist famous for its research on the subject, also likened the skeletal structure of australopithecines to that of modern orang-utans.
Briefly, Australopithecines have no bond with humans and are merely a species of extinct ape.

Homo habilis: The monkey was presented as Human
The great similarity between the structures bone and skull Australopithecus and chimpanzees, and the refutation of the claim that these creatures walked upright, have caused great difficulty paleoanthropologists evolutionists. The reason is that according to the imaginary evolution scheme, Homo erectus comes after Australopithecus. As the name of the genus Homo (which means "man") implies, Homo erectus is a human species and its skeleton is straight. Its cranial capacity is twice that of Australopithecus. A transition direct Australopithecus, an ape chimpanzee, that Homo erectus, which has a skeleton no different from modern man, is out of the question even According to evolutionary theory. Therefore, "links", ie "transitional forms" are required. The concept of Homo habilis emerged this need.
The classification of Homo habilis was filed in 1960 by Leakey, a family of "fossil hunters." According to Leakey, the new species, classified as Homo habilis, had a relatively large cranial capacity, the ability to walk upright and use tools of stone and wood. Therefore, it could have been the ancestor of man.
New fossils of the same species discovered in the 1980s, would completely change this view. Some researchers, such as Bernard Wood and C. Loring Brace, who relied on these newly discovered fossil, said that Homo habilis (which means "skillful man" ie, the man capable of using tools) should be classified as Australopithecus habilis, or "skillful southern ape", because Homo habilis had a lot of features in common with the australopithecine apes. His long arms, short legs and an ape-like skeletal structure of Australopithecus. Their fingers were suitable for climbing. His jaw was very similar to that of apes today. Their 600 cc average cranial capacity is also an indication of the fact that they were monkeys. In short, Homo habilis, which was presented as a distinct species by some evolutionists, was really a kind of ape like all the other australopithecines.
Research in the years since Wood and Brace's work has shown that Homo habilis was indeed no different from Australopithecus. The skull and OH62 fossil skeleton found by Tim White showed that this species had a small cranial capacity and long arms and short legs that enabled them to climb trees as do modern apes.
The detailed analysis by the American anthropologist Holly Smith in 1994 shows that Homo habilis was not Homo, in other words, "human" at all, but rather uniquely a "monkey." Speaking of the analysis carried out on teeth Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis, Smith stated the following;
Restricting analysis of fossils to specimens satisfying these criteria, patterns of dental development of gracile australopithecines and Homo habilis are classified with African apes. Those of Homo erectus and Neanderthals are classified humans.
In the same year, Fred Spoor, Bernard Wood and Frans Zonneveld, all specialists on anatomy, reached a similar conclusion through a totally different method. This method is based on comparative analysis of the semicircular canals of the inner ear of humans and apes which provided for maintaining balance. Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld concluded that:
Among the fossil hominids the earliest species to demonstrate the modern human morphology is Homo erectus. On the contrary, the dimensions of the semicircular canal in skulls from southern Africa attributed to Australopithecus and Paranthropus resemble those of the existing great apes.
Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld also studied a Homo habilis specimen, namely Stw 53, and found that "Stw 53 relied less on the behavior of the australopithecines bipeds. "This means that the H. habilis specimen was even more ape-like species Australopithecus. It concluded that" Stw 53 represents a bit likely intermediate between the morphologies seen in Australopithecus and Homo erectus. "
This finding yielded two important results:
1. The fossils known Homo habilis did not really belong to the genus Homo, ie humans, but to that of Australopithecus, ie apes.
2. Both Homo habilis and Australopithecus were creatures that walked stooped forward, that is, they had the skeleton of an ape. They have no connection with the man.

Homo rudolfensis: The Face Joined unduly
Homo rudolfensis term is the name given to a few fossil fragments unearthed in 1972. The species supposedly represented by the fossil was Homo rudolfensis designated because these fossil fragments were found in the vicinity of Lake Rudolf in Kenya. Most agree that these fossils paleoanthropologists not belong to a distinct species, but the creature called Homo rudolfensis is actually indistinguishable from Homo habilis.
Richard Leakey, who unearthed the fossils, presented the skull named "KNM-ER 1470, which he said was 2.8 million years, as the greatest discovery in the history of anthropology. According to Leakey, this creature, who had a small cranial capacity like that of Australopithecus together with a face similar to that of humans today, was the link lost between Australopithecus and humans. However, after a while, he realized that the human-like face of the KNM-ER 1470 skull, which frequently appeared on the covers of scientific journals and popular science magazines was the result of improper assembly of the fragments of skull, which may have been deliberate. Professor Tim Bromage, who conducts research on human facial anatomy, brought this to light with the help of computer simulations in 1992:
When [KNM-ER 1470] was the first reconstruction, the face was equipped with the skull in a nearly vertical position, much like the flat faces of modern humans. But recent studies of anatomical relationships show that in the life of the face must have stuck out considerably, creating a look similar to mono, not the faces of Australopithecus.
The evolutionary paleoanthropologist JE Cronin states the following about it:
… its relatively robustly constructed face, flattish naso-alveolar clivus, (remembering australopithecine faces served), low maximum cranial width (on time), played strong canines and large molars (as indicated in the remaining roots) are relatively primitive traits which ally the specimen with the members of the A. africanus taxon.
C. Loring Brace of the University of Michigan reached the same conclusion. As a result of the analysis made in the jaw and tooth structure of skull 1470, reported that "from the size of the palate and the expansion of the area allocated to the roots of molars, it appears that ER 1470 retained a fully Australopithecus-sized face and teeth. "
Professor Alan Walker, a paleoanthropologist Johns Hopkins University who has done much research on KNM-ER 1470 as Leakey, maintains that this creature should not be classified as a member of Homo-ie, as a kind human, but rather should be placed in the genus Australopithecus.
In summary, classifications like Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis presented as transitional forms between australopithecines and Homo erectus are completely imaginary. It has been confirmed by many researchers today that these creatures are members of the Australopithecus series. All traits anatomical reveal that this species of apes.
This has been down in two evolutionary anthropologists, Bernard Wood and Mark Collard, whose research was published in 1999 in the journal Science. Wood and Collard explained that the Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis (Skull 1470) taxa are imaginary, and that fossils assigned to these categories should be attributed to the genus Australopithecus:
More recently, fossil species have been assigned to Homo on the basis of absolute brain size, inferences about language ability and hand function, and retrodictions on their ability to fashion stone tools. With few exceptions, the definition and use of gender in human evolution, and the demarcation of Homo, have been treated as if they were unproblematic. But … Recent data, new interpretations of the evidence exists, and the limitations of registry paleoanthropological invalidate existing criteria for attributing taxa to Homo.
… In species of fossil hominids practice are assigned to Homo on the basis of one or more of the four criteria. … It is now clear, however, that none of these criteria is satisfactory. The Cerebral Rubicon is problematic because absolute cranial capacity is of questionable biological significance. Similarly, evidence that language function can not be inferred reliably the macroscopic appearance of the brain, and that language-related parts of the brain are not as well localized as earlier studies had implied …
… In other words, with the hypodigms H. and H. habilis rudolfensis assigned to it, the genus Homo is not a genre well. Thus, H. and H. habilis rudolfensis (Homo habilis sensu O lato for those who do not subscribe to the taxonomic subdivision of "Homo") should be removed from Homo. The obvious taxonomic alternative, which is the transfer of one or both of the taxa to one of the existing early hominin genera, is not without its problems, but we recommend that, for the moment, both H. H. habilis and rudolfensis should be transferred to the genus Australopithecus.
The conclusion of Wood and Collard corroborates the conclusion that we have had here, "primitive ancestors humans do not exist in history. The creatures that is alleged that in reality are so cute to be assigned to the genus Australopithecus. The fossil record shows that there an evolutionary relationship between extinct apes and Homo, ie, human species that suddenly appears in the fossil record.

Homo Erectus and Thereafter: man
According to the scheme suggested by evolutionists fantasy, internal evolution of the Homo genus is as follows: First Homo erectus, then called "primitive man" Homo sapiens and Neanderthals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis), and finally, Cro-Magnon man (Homo sapiens sapiens). However, all these classifications are really only variations and unique races in the human family. The difference between them is not greater than the difference between an Inuit and a pygmy African or a European and a.
Consider first Homo erectus, known as the most primitive human species. As its name implies, "Homo erectus" means "man walking upright. "Evolutionists have had to separate these fossils from the above, adding the qualifier" verticality ", because all the fossil of Homo erectus are directly available to an extent not observed in any of the australopithecines or so-called Homo habilis specimens. There is no difference between the postcranial of modern humans and Homo erectus.

The principal reason for evolutionists erectus Homo defined as "primitive" is the cranial capacity of skull (from 900 to 1.100 cc), which is smaller than the average modern man, and his thick eyebrow projections. However, there are many people living today in the world with the same cranial capacity as Homo erectus (pygmies, for example) and other races that stand out the eyebrows (Native Australians, for example).
It is common agreement on the fact- that differences in cranial capacity does not necessarily denote differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence depends on the internal organization of the brain, not its volume.
The fossils that have made Homo erectus known throughout the world are those of Peking man and Java man in Asia. However, over time they realized that these two fossils are not reliable. Peking Man consists of some elements of plaster whose originals have been lost, and Java Man is "composed" of a fragment skull and a pelvic bone that was meters away from him with no indication that these belonged to the same creature. So fossils Homo erectus in Africa have gained such increasing importance. (It is also noted that some of the fossil is said that Homo erectus have been included in a second species called "Homo ergaster" by some evolutionists. There is disagreement among experts on this issue. We will treat all these fossils under the classification Homo erectus)
The most famous of the Homo erectus specimens in Africa is the fossil of Homo erectus Narikotome "or" Turkana Boy "which was found near Lake Turkana in Kenya. It is confirmed that the fossil was that of a 12-year-old, who would have been 1.83 meters tall in adolescence. The vertical structure of the skeleton of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. The American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said he doubted that "the average pathologist could tell the difference between the fossil skeleton of a modern human. "((Boyce Rensberger, The Washington Post, November 19, 1984.))
With regard to skull, Walker wrote that he laughed when he saw it because "it looked so much like a Neanderthal." ((Ibid.)) As discussed in the next chapter, Neanderthals are a modern human race. Thus, Homo erectus is also a modern human race.
Even the evolutionist Richard Leakey says the differences between Homo erectus and modern man are nothing more than racial variance:
You are also differences in skull shape, degree of protrusion of the face, robustness of the brows and so on. These differences are probably not more pronounced than we see today between the various geographical races of modern humans. Such biological variation arises when populations are geographically separated from each other for significant lengths of time.
Professor William Laughlin University of Connecticut made extensive anatomical examinations of Inuits and the people living in the Aleutian Islands, and realized that these people were extraordinarily similar to Homo erectus. Laughlin The conclusion reached was that all these distinct races were in fact different races of Homo sapiens (modern man).
When we consider the vast differences that exist between remote groups such as Eskimos and Bushmen, who are known to belong to the single species Homo sapiens, it seems justified to conclude Sinanthropus that [a model erectus] belongs within this same diverse species.
It is now become more pronounced in the scientific community that Homo erectus is a taxon superfluous, and that fossils assigned to Homo erectus class are not really so different from Homo sapiens to be considered a separate species. In American Scientist, the discussions on this issue and the outcome of a conference on the subject in 2000 are summarized in the following manner:
Most of the participants at the Senckenberg conference is immersed in a heated debate on the taxonomic status of Homo erectus started by Milford Wolpoff of the University of Michigan, Alan Thorne of the University of Canberra and his colleagues. They argued forcefully that Homo erectus had no validity as a species and should be eliminated. All members of the genus Homo about 2 million years so far, were very variable, widespread species, Homo sapiens, no natural breaks or subdivisions. The theme of the conference, Homo erectus did not exist.
The conclusion reached by scientists mentioned thesis defense can be summarized as "Homo erectus is a species of Homo sapiens, but rather a race within Homo sapiens.
On the other hand, there is a huge gap between Homo erectus, a human race, and apes that preceded Homo erectus in human evolution "Scenario (Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis). This means that the first humans appeared in the fossil record suddenly and without any prior evolutionary history. This is a clear indication of his being created.
However, admitting this fact is totally against the dogmatic philosophy and ideology evolutionists. As a result, try to represent Homo erectus, a truly human race as a half-ape creature. In its reconstruction Homo erectus, which tenaciously draw features ape. Moreover, similar methods of drawing, to humanize the apes and Australopithecus or Homo habilis. With this method, seek to "approximate" monkeys and humans and eliminate the difference between these two different kinds of life.

Neanderthals
Neanderthals were human beings who suddenly appeared 100,000 years ago in Europe, who disappeared or were assimilated by mixing with other races, it quietly but quickly 35,000 years. The only difference with the man modern age is that their skeletons are more robust and their cranial capacity slightly bigger.
Neanderthals were a human race, a fact conceded by almost everyone today day. Evolutionists have tried very hard to present them as a sort of "primitive", but all the findings indicate that they were no different from a "robust" man walking on the streets today. A prominent authority on the subject, Erik Trinkaus, a paleoanthropologist at the University of New Mexico, writes:
Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans.
Many contemporary researchers define Neanderthal man as a subspecies of modern man and call it "Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. The results testify that Neanderthals buried their dead instruments, musical fashion, and had cultural affinities with the Homo sapiens sapiens living in the same period. To put it precisely, Neanderthals are a "robust" human race that simply has faded over time.

Heilderbergensis archaic Homo sapiens, Homo and Cro-Magnon
Archaic Homo sapiens is the last step before contemporary man in the imaginary evolutionary scheme. In fact, evolutionists do not have much to say about these fossils, as there are only very small differences between them and humans modern humans. Some researchers claim that representatives of this race are still living today, and point to native Australians as an example. As that Homo sapiens (archaic), native Australians also have thick protruding eyebrows, a jaw structure into stability, and a cranial capacity slightly lower.
The group known as Homo heilderbergensis in evolutionist literature is in fact the same as the archaic Homo sapiens. The reason why two different terms are used to define the same type of the human race is the disagreement among evolutionists. All the fossils included in the classification of Homo heidelbergensis suggest that people who were anatomically very similar to modern Europeans lived until 500,000 and 740,000 years, first in England and then in Spain.
It is estimated that man Cro-Magnon man lived 30,000 years ago. It has a dome-shaped skull and forehead. The skull of 1,600 cc is above the current average man. His skull has thick eyebrow projections and a bony protrusion on the back that is characteristic of both Neanderthal and Homo erectus.
While Cro-Magnon is considered be a European race, the structure and volume of the skull of Cro-Magnon is closely resemble those of some races living in Africa and the tropics today. Based this similarity, it is estimated that Cro-Magnon was an archaic African race. Some findings paleoanthropological others have shown that the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal mixed breeds and laid the foundation for the careers of today.
As a result, none of these human beings are "primitive species." They were different human beings who lived in the past and assimilated well and mix with other races, or became extinct and disappeared from history.

Species that live in the same age as their forefathers
What we have investigated so far forms a clear picture: The scenario of "human evolution" is pure fiction. To make a family tree representing the truth, a gradual evolution from ape to man must have taken place and a fossil record of this process must be able to find. In fact, however, there is a difference between apes and humans. Skeletal structures, cranial capacities and criteria such as walking upright or bent sharply forward distinguish humans from apes.
Another significant fact proving that there can be no family relationship between the different tree species is that species that occur as the ancestors of others, in fact, lived at the same time. If, as evolutionists claim, Australopithecus became Homo habilis, which in turn, became in Homo erectus, the periods in which they lived would necessarily have followed each other. However, there is no such chronological order to be seen in the fossil record.
According to evolutionist estimates, Australopithecus lived from 4 million to 1 million years ago. The creatures classified as Homo habilis, on the other hand, it is believed who have lived to 1.7 up to 1.9 million years ago. Homo rudolfensis, said to have been more "advanced" than Homo habilis, is known to be as old as 2.5 to 2.8 million years! That is, the Homo rudolfensis is almost 1 million years older than Homo habilis, which is alleged to have been the "ancestor." Moreover, the age of Homo erectus goes back years and from 1.6 to 1,800,000, which means that Homo erectus appeared on earth at the same time period as so-called ancestor, Homo habilis.
Alan Walker confirms this fact by stating that "no evidence of Africa's eastern end of the little guys survivors Australopithecus who were contemporaries first with H. Habilis, then with the H. erectus. "((Alan Walker, Science, vol 207, 1980, p. 1103.))
Louis Leakey found fossils of Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus almost next to each other in the Olduvai Gorge region of Tanzania, in the Bed II layer.
There is definitely no such family tree. Stephen Jay Gould, who was a Harvard University paleontologist, explained this deadlock faced by evolution, although he himself was an evolutionist:
What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids (A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly derived from another? Moreover, none of the three evolutionary trends show during his tenure on earth.
When we move from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens, we again that there is no family tree to talk about. There is evidence that Homo erectus and archaic Homo sapiens continued to live up to 27,000 years and recently even up to 10,000 years before our time. The Kow Swamp in Australia, some 13,000 years skulls of Homo erectus have been found. On the island of Java, Homo erectus remains were found that are 27,000 years old.

The Secret History of Homo Sapiens
The most interesting and significant that overrides the base of the tree itself imaginary family of evolutionary theory is the unexpectedly ancient history of modern man. paleoanthropological findings reveal that Homo sapiens was exactly people As long as we lived a million years ago.
It was Louis Leakey, the famous evolutionary paleoanthropologist, who discovered the first conclusions this issue. In 1932, the Kanjera region around Lake Victoria in Kenya, Leakey found several fossils that belonged to the Middle Pleistocene, and were not different from man modern. However, the Middle Pleistocene was a million years. Since these discoveries turned the evolutionary family tree upside down, were dismissed paleoanthropologists some evolutionists. But Leakey has always maintained that its estimates were correct.
Just when this controversy was about to be forgotten, a fossil unearthed in Spain in 1995 revealed a very remarkable that the history of Homo sapiens was much greater than had been assumed. The fossil in question was discovered in a cave called Gran Dolina at Atapuerca region of Spain by three Spanish paleoanthropologists Polytechnic University of Madrid. The fossil revealed the face of a child under 11 years of age, who seemed quite as modern man. However, it was 800,000 years since the child died. Discover magazine covered history in great detail in its report of December 1997 issue.
This fossil even shook the convictions of Juan Luis Arsuaga Ferreras, who lead the excavation of Great Dolina. Ferreras said:
We expected something big, something large, something inflated-you know, something primitive. What we expect from a child of 800,000 years was something like Turkana Boy. And what we found was a totally modern face …. To me this is most spectacular-these are the kinds of things to shake. Finding something totally unexpected like that. With no fossils to find fossils is unexpected too, and it's okay. But the most spectacular thing is finding something that apparently belonging to the current in the past. It's like finding something like a tape recorder in Gran Dolina. That would be very surprising. We do not expect cassettes and tape recorders in the Lower Pleistocene. Finding a modern face 800,000 years ago, is the same thing. We were very surprised when we saw him.
The fossil revealed the fact that the history of Homo sapiens had to be extended back and 800,000 years ago. After recovering from the initial shock, the evolutionists who discovered the fossil decided that belonged to another species, because, as the family tree of evolution, Homo sapiens lived 800,000 years. Therefore, consisting of a sort of imaginary called "Homo antecessor" and included the Atapuerca skull under this classification.

Cabin 1.7 million years
There have been many findings demonstrating that Homo sapiens dates back even earlier than 800,000 years. One of them is a discovery by Louis Leakey in 1970 at Olduvai Gorge. Here in the Bed II layer, Leakey discovered that Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus species have coexisted in the same time. What is even more interesting was a structure Leakey found in the same layer (Bed II). Here, found the remains of a stone hut. The unusual aspect of the event was that this construction, which is still used in parts of Africa, could only have been built by Homo sapiens! Thus, according to Leakey's findings, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and modern man must have co-existed approximately 1.7 billion years. This discovery must surely invalidate the evolutionary theory states that modern humans evolved from species such as ape-like Australopithecus.

Footprints of Modern Man, 3.6 million years!
In fact, some other discoveries trace the origins modern man back to 1.7 million years ago. One of the important findings is the footprints found in Laetoli, Tanzania, by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer that was estimated at 3.6 million years, and most important is that the footprints were different from contemporary man would leave.
The footprints found by Mary Leakey were later examined by a number of paleoanthropologists famous as Donald Johanson and Tim White. The results were the same. White wrote:
Make no mistake about it … They are like modern human footprints. If one is left in the sand of a California beach today, and a four year old child asked what it was instantly tell that someone had come there. He would not be able to say a hundred other prints on the beach, or you. ((Donald C. Johanson & MA Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981, p. 250.))
After examining the footprints, Robbins Louis University Northern California made the following comments:
The arch is raised-the smaller individual had a bow taller than me and the big toe is large and aligned with the second toe … The fingers grip the ground like human toes. You do not see this in animal shapes. ((Science News, Vol 115, 1979, p. 196-197.))
Examinations the morphological form of the footprints showed time and again they had to be accepted as the footprints of a human being, and on the other hand, a modern human Homo sapiens (). Russell Tuttle, who also examined the footsteps wrote:
A small barefoot Homo sapiens could have made … In all morphological features appreciable, the feet of the people who made the trails are indistinguishable from those of modern humans.
impartial examinations of the footprints revealed their real owners. In reality, these footprints consisted of 20 fossilized footprints of a 10-year-old modern human and 27 footprints of an even younger. They were certainly people like us modern.
This situation put the Laetoli footprints in the center of debate for years. paleoanthropologists evolutionists desperately tried to reach an explanation, because it was difficult for them to accept the fact that modern man had been walking on the earth 3.6 million years ago. During the 1990s, the following "explanation" began to take shape: The evolutionists decided that these footprints must have been left by an Australopithecus, because according to their theory, it was impossible for a Homo species have existed for 3.6 years. However, Russell H. Tuttle wrote in an article published in 1990:
In sum, the 3.5 million-year-old features footprint in the Laetoli site G resemble those of habitually barefoot modern human. None of its features suggest that the Laetoli hominids were less capable bipeds us. If the G footprints were not known for being old, easily come to the conclusion that had been made by a member of our genus, Homo … In any case, we must cast aside the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints were made by type of Lucy, Australopithecus afarensis.
In short, these traces assumed at 3.6 million years could not have belonged to Australopithecus. The only reason why the footprints were thought to have been left by members of Australopithecus volcanic layer was 3.6 million years in which the footprints were found. The prints were ascribed to Australopithecus only on the assumption that humans could not having lived so long ago.
These interpretations of the Laetoli footprints demonstrate one important fact. Evolutionists support their theory is not based on scientific findings, but despite them. Here is a theory that is blindly defended no matter what, with all new discoveries that cast doubt on the theory that may consist therefore ignored or manipulated to support the theory.
In short, the theory of evolution is not science, is a dogma kept alive despite science.

The Impasse of Evolution Bipedalism
In addition to the fossil record we have discussed so far, unbridgeable anatomical gaps between men and apes also invalidate the fiction of human evolution. One of these has to do with the way you walk.
Human beings walk upright on two feet. This is a very special locomotion not seen in other mammalian species. Some other animals have a limited ability to move when standing on its hind legs. Animals such as bears and monkeys can move in this way only rarely, and when they wish to reach a food source, and even then only for a short time. Normally, their skeletons bend forward and walk on all fours.
It has bipedalism evolved from quadrupedal gait of apes, as evolutionists claim?
Por Of course not. Research has shown that the evolution of bipedalism never happened, or you may have. First of all, bipedalism is not an evolutionary advantage. The way monkeys move is much easier, faster and more efficient than man's bipedal step. Man can not move jumping from tree to tree without falling to the ground, like a chimpanzee, or run at a speed of 125 kilometers per hour, like a cheetah. On the contrary, since man walks on two feet, squirms more slowly in the soil. For the same reason, he is one of the most vulnerable of all species in nature in terms of movement and defense. According to logic of the theory of evolution, the monkeys have not evolved to adopt a bipedal step, human beings should have evolved instead to be quadrupeds.
Another evolutionary dead end of the claim is that bipedalism does not serve the "progressive development" model of Darwinism. This model, which is the basis of evolution, it requires a "compound" stride between bipedalism and quadruple. However, research conducted computerized in 1996, the English paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton showed that a "compound" calm was not possible. Crompton reached the following conclusion: A living being can walk upright or on all fours. ((Ruth Henke, Aufrecht "aus den Bäumen" Focus, Vol 39, 1996, p. 178.)).
A kind of step between the two is impossible it would involve excessive energy consumption. Why is half of being bipedal can not exist.
The immense gap between man and ape is not limited to bipedalism. Many other issues still remain unexplained, such as the brain's ability, the ability to speak, and so on. Elaine Morgan, an evolutionist paleoanthropologist, makes the following confession in relation to this matter:
Four of the most outstanding mysteries about humans are: 1) Why walk on two legs? 2) Why have lost their skin? 3) Why were developed such large brains? 4) Why learn to speak?
The orthodox answers to these questions are: 1) "We still do not know" 2) "We still do not know" 3) "We still do not know," 4) "Do not know yet. "The list of questions could be considerably lengthened without affecting the monotony of the responses.

Evolution: Faith is not scientific
Lord Solly Zuckerman is one of the most famous and respected scientists in the United Kingdom. For years, he studied the fossil record and carried out much research detailed. It was raised to the nobility for his contributions to science. Zuckerman is an evolutionist. Therefore, his comments on evolution can not be seen as ignorant or prejudiced. After years of research on the fossils included in the stage of human evolution, however, concluded that there is no truth in the family tree is presented.
Zuckerman also advanced an interesting concept of "spectrum of science", from which scientific thought whom he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman's spectrum, the more "scientific", ie based on concrete data-fields are chemistry and physics. After them come the biological sciences and social sciences. At the other end of the spectrum, which is the most considered to be "little scientific "are" extra-sensory perception "-concepts such as telepathy and the" sixth sense "and finally" evolution human. "Zuckerman explains his reasoning as follows:
Then move to the right of the register objective truth into those fields of biological science presumably, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of the fossil history of man, where the faithful anything is possible – and where the ardent believer is sometimes able believe several contradictory things at once.
Robert Locke, editor of the archaeological find, a major publication on the origins of man, writes in this magazine, "The search for human ancestors gives more heat than light," quoting the confession of the famous evolutionist paleoantropologist Tim White:
We are all frustrated by "all the questions that have not been able to respond."
Locke article reviews the current deadlock of the theory of evolution about the origin of man and unfounded propaganda about the spread this topic:
Perhaps no area of science is more contentious than the search of human origins. Elite paleontologists disagree over the most basic outline of the human family tree. New branches grow amid great fanfare, only to wither and die in the face of new fossil is found.
The same fact was also recently accepted by Henry Gee, editor of the journal well-known Nature. In his book In Search of Deep Time published in 1999, Gee points out that all the evidence for human evolution "between about 10 and 5 million years-several thousands of generations of living creatures can fit into a small box. "He concludes that conventional theories about the origin and development of human beings are "a completely human invention created after the fact, shaped according to human prejudice," adding:
To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as bedtime-story funny, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.
So what is the reason that makes many scientists so tenacious about this dogma? Why what we've been trying very hard to keep alive his theory at the expense of admitting countless conflicts and discounting the evidence found?
The only answer is their fear that will have to face on leaving the theory of evolution. The fact that it will face when they leave the development is that God created man. However, taking into account the budgets they have and the materialist philosophy that they believe the creation is a concept unacceptable to the evolutionists.
For this reason, they are mistaken, and the world, using media with which they cooperate. If they can find fossils is necessary, are "manufactured" them either in the form of imaginary pictures or models Fictional and try to give the impression that there were in fact fossil of verification of evolution. Part of the media who share their materialistic viewpoint are also trying to deceive the public and to reinforce the history of evolution in the subconscious of people.
No matter how hard they try, the truth is obvious: the man has come into existence not through an evolutionary process, but by the God's creation. Therefore, it is responsible to him.

Please consult this book to learn more about the origin of other living beings:
Darwinism refuted (Book)
PDF file format:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=85&Format=pdf

Word file format:
http://api.fmanager.net/api_v1/xmlapi.php?dev-t=EDCRFV&with=mod=file, id = 13 732

Another useful book and website in different languages:
Evolution Deceit (Book)
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=462&Format=pdf
Website:
www.evolutiondeceit.com

Darwin's imagination
The person who proposed the theory of evolution in the way it currently maintains, was an English amateur naturalist, Charles Robert Darwin.
Darwin had never undergone a formal education in biology. It took only an amateur interest in the theme of nature and humans alive. His interest led him to voluntarily join an expedition aboard a ship called the HMS Beagle sailed from England in 1832 and traveled through different regions of world for five years. Young Darwin was greatly impressed by the living species, especially certain that the finches he saw in the Galapagos Islands. He thought that variations in their beaks were caused by their adaptation to their habitat. With this in mind, it is assumed that the origin of life and species lay in the concept of "adaptation the environment. "Darwin objected to the fact that God created different living species separately, suggesting that more good came from a common ancestor and differentiated each other as a result of natural conditions.
Darwin's hypothesis was not based on any scientific discovery or experiment, however in time became a pretentious theory with the support and encouragement he received from the famous materialist biologists of his time. The idea was that individuals adapted to the habitat best qualities transferred to subsequent generations, two qualities advantageous accumulated over time and transforms the individual into an entirely different from their ancestors. (The origin of these "advantageous qualities" was unknown at the time.) According to Darwin, man was the result of this mechanism more developed imagination.
Darwin called this process "evolution by natural selection." He thought he had found the "Origin of Species": the origin one species was another species. He published these views in his book entitled The Origin of Species by Natural Selection in 1859.
Darwin was aware that its theory is facing many problems. He admitted this in his book in the chapter "Difficulties of the theory." These difficulties mainly consisted of fossil record, complex organs of living beings could not be explained by coincidence (eg the eye), and the instincts of living beings. Darwin hoped that these difficulties would be overcome by new discoveries, but this did not prevent him up with a very insufficient number of explanations for some. The American Physical Lipson made the following comments about the "difficulties" of Darwin:
After reading The Origin of Species, I found that Darwin was much less secure of himself that he often represents the chapter entitled "Difficulties of the Theory" for example, shows a considerable lack of confidence. As physical, I was particularly intrigued by his comments on how the eye would have occurred. ((Lipson SA, "View of a Physical Theory of Darwin, evolutionary trends in plants, Vol 2, No. 1, 1988, p. 6.))
During the development of his theory, Darwin was impressed by evolutionary biologists many before him, and especially by the French biologist Lamarck. According to Lamarck, living beings who have passed the traits acquired during the life of a generation to another and has evolved so much. For instance, giraffes evolved from animals like antelopes, by extending their necks further and further from one generation to another as they tried to reach higher and higher branches for food. Darwin and the theory used to "pass acquired traits", proposed by Lamarck as the factor that made living things evolve.
But both Darwin and Lamarck were wrong because in his day, life could only be studied with technology very primitive and in a very inappropriate. scientific fields such as genetics and biochemistry did not exist even in name. Their theories therefore had to rely full of his powers of imagination.
While the echoes of Darwin's book reverberated, an Austrian botanist by the name of Gregor Mendel discovered the laws of inheritance in 1865. There is not much heard of until the end of the century, Mendel's discovery gained great importance in the 1900s. This was the birth of the science of genetics. Shortly thereafter, the structure of genes and chromosomes was discovered. The discovery in the 1950s, the structure of the DNA molecule that incorporates genetic information threw the theory of evolution towards a major crisis. The reason was the incredible complexity of life and the invalidity of the evolutionary mechanisms proposed by Darwin.
This development should have led to Darwin's theory being banished to the dustbin of history. However, it was because certain circles stressed in the review, renewal and elevation of the theory of scientific platform. These efforts gain meaning only if we realize that behind theory was the ideological intentions rather than scientific concerns.

Links:
Videos:
THE COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1245

The collapse of atheism:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1244

THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE:
http://harunyahya.com/m_video_creation_universe.php

The miracle of man's creation:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1249

Books:

The Collapse of the Theory of evolution in 20 questions:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=80&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Disasters Darwinism brought to humanity:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Millions of tests that refute Darwinism
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
A definitive answer to the evolutionist propaganda:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
How Fossils Overturned Evolution:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Religion of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1959&Format=rtf
=*=*=*=*=
It is no accident:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1815&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
A definitive answer evolutionist propaganda
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Why El Darwinism is incompatible with the Koran:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=208&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Darwinism Brought disasters to humanity
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Fascism Ideology Bloody Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=225&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Dark Write of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=2182&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Golden Age
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1462&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=

=* For any help do not hesitate to send me a message ON *=
smiling4ever222@hotmail.com

About the Author

[affmage source="amazon" results="5"]finches michigan[/affmage]

[phpbay]finches michigan,60,”",”"[/phpbay