Evolution – Did Man Evolve from Apelike Ancestors
Table of Contents
Overview
The Bible tells us that God made man in His image, and that He created them (man and woman) in His likeness.
– Genesis 1.27
The Bible tells us that God directly created mankind from the dust of the earth and when God breathed the breath of life, he became alive or a living soul:
– Genesis 2.7
Genesis gives the account of how man came into existence, directly created by God. Just as all other living creatures were created directly by God, so too was man created specifically and directly by God. This negates the idea that mankind evolved from any other creature besides mankind. Mankind did not evolve from any other species or kind of being; mankind did not evolve from any apelike ancestor. Instead, mankind came into existence directly through the creation of God. This process is the same for all living creatures that God created.
However, like all other doctrines of demons, the theory of evolution is designed to lead people astray from the truth and from God. It continues to attempt to deceive humanity into believing that they were not specially created by God, but rather were the result of some natural process that caused them to evolve from ape to human.
One of the oldest known proposals suggesting that humans descended from an apelike ancestor was made by Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century Islamic philosopher who wrote the following:
“The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man after the world of monkeys. This is as far as our physical observation extends”
– Ibn Khaldun 1967: 195
The idea that humans evolved from apelike ancestors was gaining popularity in the scientific community by the time Charles Darwin published The Descent of Man in 1871. In the book, Darwin proposed that humans and apes share a common ancestor, with apes of Africa such as gorillas and chimpanzees being the most similar to humans. He also suggested that early humans likely originated in Africa.
To this day there is no fossil evidence to support this claim. The only known human fossils, which were a few tens of thousands of years old on the evolutionary time scale, were found in Europe.
Evolution of Man – Descended from Apelike Ancestors
Like all evolutionary ideas, the evidence proposed to support their claims comes from interpretations of fossils and the genetics of humans in comparisons with primate species (monkeys, apes, chimps, etc.).
Transitional Fossils and Missing Links
There have been no transitional fossils discovered that links man with any primate species. All supposed missing links have either been deemed frauds or inconclusive. The fact that Darwinian Evolution would require thousands or millions of minute transitions between each variation or change leading from ape to become human should have left behind billions of fossils to be discovered (i.e. gradual changes in foot structure should be discovered millions of times over, slowly evolving from an apes foot to human). What is actually found are either primate or human remains, exactly as we find all other animal species fully intact according to their kind in accord with their originally created ancestor.
Artists Misconceptions Blur the Lines
When we see images of ancient man or human ancestors based on remains found by archaeologists, it’s important to remember that these are interpretations created by artists. Many artists are given skulls and fragments of ancient people or primates and asked to reconstruct what they might have looked like.
From the perspective of an artist, the question arises: should the person resemble a man or an ape?
Artists can create anything based on the preconceived notions provided by scientists who gave them the remains, who themselves may have presupposed what these individuals looked like. There is no concrete evidence that any ape-man depicted accurately reflects the appearance of these ancient individuals.
Evidence of differences between human skulls
Even today, people from various countries and regions have vast differences in their skull size and shape. These differences only indicate genetic diversity between these people groups. Any artists could make any of these skulls look as animal or human as they choose, but this doesn’t change the fact each are as human as the next.
All human skulls ever discovered are remarkably similar to modern-day humans. These variations are akin to the differences we see among different population groups across different continents today. The Bible suggests that humans lived much longer in ancient times, and there was likely a wider genetic diversity then, allowing for a broader range of skull types and physical variations.
Fossils
There have been numerous fossils that have been claims to have been the evidence for the evolution of man from primate species. Most of these claims have been debunked as clever forgeries or just bad interpretations.
Nebraska Man
Basing conclusions on a single bone can be highly problematic, as illustrated by an incident involving paleontologist Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1922. Osborn, an ardent evolutionist, was shown a single tooth found in Nebraska by geologist Harold Cook. Upon examination, Osborn declared it belonged to an early ape-man, naming it “Hesperopithecus haroldcookii” in Cook’s honor, popularly known as “Nebraska Man.” Osborn enthusiastically hailed the tooth as “the herald of anthropoid apes in America.”
At the American Museum of Natural History, specialists William K. Gregory and Milo Hellman, after careful study, concluded that the tooth belonged to a species closer to man than ape. Zoology professor Harris Hawthorne Wilder also weighed in, suggesting that based on the tooth alone, the animal seemed to be somewhere between Pithecanthropus (Java Man) and modern man, or perhaps closer to the Neanderthal type.
In England, evolutionist Grafton Elliot Smith convinced the Illustrated London News to publish an artist’s rendering of Nebraska Man, which depicted two brutish, naked ape-like individuals, one male with a club and the other female gathering roots.
However, subsequent excavations at Cook’s site revealed that the tooth did not belong to an ape or a man but to a peccary, a close relative of the pig. This cautionary tale highlights the potential pitfalls of drawing sweeping conclusions based on limited evidence, emphasizing the importance of thorough and rigorous scientific investigation in paleontology and evolutionary biology.
Peking Man
The Peking Man refers to pieces of skull found in the 1920s in Peking, China. Unfortunately, all evidence was lost during World War II. What many people may not know is that the remains of at least 10 humans were also found alongside these “monkey” bones, challenging the idea of Peking Man as a “missing link” in human evolution.
Peking Man’s significance was bolstered by the work of several researchers, including Davidson Black, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Smith, who were involved in the Piltdown Man hoax. However, few students learning about Peking Man from textbooks were informed that the skulls were discovered in fragmented pieces and that the reconstructions were actually composites assembled from various individuals.
Plaster was used to fill in missing fragments, and the well-known images of Peking Man were the creations of sculptress Lucille Swann. Curiously, most of the Peking Man fossils disappeared later, except for a couple of teeth, which prevented further examination that ultimately exposed the Piltdown Man hoax.
Piltdown Man
Consider the case of the Piltdown Man, which was heralded as a significant discovery in the early 20th century. Declared an ape-man and purported to be 500,000 years old, it was validated by many of Britain’s leading scientists, including Grafton Elliot Smith, Sir Arthur Keith, and Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum. The announcement of the discovery in 1912 prompted headlines such as “Darwin Theory Proved True” in the New York Times. For the following four decades, Piltdown Man stood as a flagship example of evolution, prominently featured in textbooks and encyclopedias.
However, the reality of Piltdown Man was far from what it seemed. It was later revealed that the remains consisted of a very recent orangutan jaw, which had been artificially stained to appear old, with its teeth deliberately filed down to resemble human teeth. This jaw was then planted alongside a human skull bone, also stained to create the illusion of age.
The Piltdown Man hoax serves as a cautionary tale about the potential for deception and manipulation in scientific discovery. It underscores the importance of rigorous scrutiny and skepticism in evaluating purported evidence, as well as the need for transparency and integrity in scientific investigation.
Cro-Magnon Man
Cro-Magnon man was found to be indistinguishable from modern humans. At first believed to be a missing link, now have been identified as early European settlers that migrated from western Asia.
Australopithecines
Australopithecine fossils exhibit characteristics such as long forearms and short hind legs, similar to today’s apes, and was considered as one of many modern homo sapiens important specimens. They also possess long, curved fingers and toes, reminiscent of those used by apes for tree-swinging. This poses a challenge to the traditional evolutionary thesis, particularly in light of claims that the toe bone of Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba, dated to over 5 million years ago, displays relatively human-like features. This suggests that Ardipithecus may have been more evolved than the later australopithecines, who supposedly appeared around 2 million years later.
While some evidence suggests that australopithecines like the famous “Lucy” and her peers may have exhibited limited bipedality, which is often interpreted as evidence of upright walking, it’s important to note that bipedality alone does not necessarily prove human ancestry. Contrary to the impression sometimes portrayed, many scientists have disagreed with the assertion that australopithecines are direct ancestors of modern humans
“For my own part, the anatomical basis for the claim that the australopithecines walked and ran upright like man is so much more flimsy than the evidence which points to the conclusion that their gait was some variant of what one sees in subhuman primates, that it remains unacceptable.”
– Lord Solly Zuckerman, Britain’s lead authority on australopithecines statement after years of biometric testing.
Charles Oxnard, former director of graduate studies and professor of anatomy at the University of Southern California Medical School, conducted extensive computer analysis on australopithecine fossils. Stephen Jay Gould, a prominent evolutionary biologist, referred to Oxnard as “our leading expert on the quantitative study of skeletons.” Oxnard’s conclusions challenge the traditional narrative of human evolution. He stated:
“The australopithecines known over the last several decades are now irrevocably removed from a place in the evolution of human bipedalism, possibly from a place in a group any closer to humans than to African apes and certainly from any place in the direct human lineage. All of this should make us wonder about the usual presentation of human evolution in introductory textbooks, in encyclopedias and in popular publications. In such volumes not only are australopithecines described as being of known bodily size and shape, but as possessing such abilities as bipedality and tool-using and -making and such developments as the use of fire and specific social structures. Even facial features are happily (and non-scientifically) reconstructed.”
– Stephen Jay Gould, Evolutionary Biologist
Our comparison of the profile and full-face of the Taung specimen with corresponding views of human and anthropoid skulls leaves no doubt as to the true anthropoid status of Australopithecus, viz. that in all its essential characters it is a true anthropoid ape.”
– Sir Arthur Keith, “New Discoveries Relating to the Antiquity of Man”, 1931, p. 103
Java Man
One of Haeckel’s students, Eugene Dubois, was determined to find Pithecanthropus, believing that humans might have originated from apes in Southern Asia. In 1887, Dubois joined the Dutch medical corps in the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia) with the intention of searching for fossils in his spare time. It’s worth noting that Dubois had no formal training in geology or paleontology at the time, and his “archaeological team” consisted of prison convicts supervised by two army corporals. Despite years of excavation yielding little of significance, Dubois persisted.
In 1891, laborers along Java’s Solo River unearthed a skullcap that appeared apelike, with a low forehead and large eyebrow ridges. Initially, Dubois considered it to be from a chimpanzee, despite no evidence of such apes living in Asia. However, the following year, the discovery of a human thigh bone alongside the skullcap led Dubois to presume that the two belonged to the same creature, fulfilling Darwin’s missing link. Haeckel, who hadn’t seen the bones, enthusiastically telegrammed Dubois: “From the inventor of Pithecanthropus to his happy discoverer!”
Upon returning to Europe in 1895, Dubois displayed his fossils, but the response from experts was mixed. Rudolph Virchow, regarded as the father of modern pathology, believed the creature to be an animal, possibly a giant gibbon, and dismissed the connection between the skull and thigh bone. The circumstances of Dubois’ find were also questioned, with no maps or diagrams of the excavation site made until after the excavation.
In 1907, a German expedition led by Professor M. Lenore Selenka sought further clues to human ancestry in the region of Dubois’ discovery. However, no evidence for Pithecanthropus was found, and the expedition’s report suggested that the volcanic sediments in which Java Man was found, along with periodic flooding caused by a nearby volcano, likely played a role in the fossilization process. Despite these findings and criticisms of Dubois’ work, Java Man became widely accepted as evidence for human evolution.
Dubois took an ape’s skull cap, and three human teeth plus a thigh bone (found a year later and 50 feet (15 M) away) from a human and informed the world he had found the “missing link.” He hid the fact that he had also found 2 normal human skulls in the same area. His deceit was revealed 30 years later. – See Bones of Contention p. 86
Genetics
Evolutionary scientists have claimed that human and primate DNA are almost 98-99% similar, however as the human genome has been mapped, it has been discovered that is not even remotely true. Humans are roughly 80% similar in their DNA, which is at best the same between most other mammals. Evolutionists have attempted to answer the question is human and chimp DNA similar.
Further scientists have discovered that comparing the genome between human and primates, they are far too different to even make a common evolutionary ancestor plausible.
Human and Chimp DNA Comparison Video
Neanderthals
The depiction of Neanderthals as ape-like creatures, stooped over and primitive, was largely influenced by a faulty reconstruction by French paleontologist Marcellin Boule. Boule mistakenly interpreted the skeletal remains of a Neanderthal with kyphosis (hunchback) as representative of their typical posture, leading to the misconception of Neanderthals as hunched over and primitive.
Contrary to earlier portrayal, Neanderthals where not primitive ape-men, but rather distinct humans that lived in Eurasia. Neanderthal skulls are larger than those of modern humans suggesting larger brain size, which flies in the face of evolutionary tradition stating that man evolved progressively from creatures with smaller brains and skulls. In any event, Neanderthals are no longer viewed as ancestors of modern humans by evolutionary scientists, and have been considered as human altogether.
It’s worth noting that some Neanderthals may have had genetic diseases that affected their bone density. These conditions could have influenced the appearance of Neanderthal skeletons and may have contributed to misconceptions about their physical characteristics:
After examining the famous “Rhodesia Man” or Broken Hill man Neanderthal skull, Dr. Cuozzo said, “You must understand that this skull really cries out disease. The teeth are badly decayed, and the bones of the vault of the skull are extremely thick. There are many features that testify … of acromegaly or excess secretion of growth hormone in adulthood…”
– Dr. Jack Cuozzo, Buried Alive – Untold Story About Neanderthal Man
Cavemen
The term cavemen is relative and can refer to various groups of people throughout history who have lived in caves or similar shelters. There are instances of modern humans living in caves even today, either by choice or out of necessity, such as those displaced by natural disasters or societal upheavals.
Throughout history, there have been numerous examples of people seeking shelter in caves for various reasons, including protection from the elements, predators, or conflicts with other groups. These historical records provide insights into the adaptive behaviors of human populations in different environments and circumstances.
Ancient Tools
When archaeological excavations uncover primitive tools, they often reflect the technological capabilities of the people who created and used them. In remote or isolated regions, where access to advanced technology or resources may be limited, people may rely on crafting tools from readily available materials such as stone, wood, or bone. This practice of tool-making is not limited to ancient times but can also be observed in modern societies living in remote areas around the world.
Overall, the presence of cave dwellings and primitive tools in archaeological records does not necessarily indicate a specific timeframe but rather reflects the adaptive strategies of human populations across different environments and periods of history.
References
National Center for Science Education – Islamic Special Creation
Answers in Genesis – Human and Chimp DNA
Institute for Creation Research – DNA Study Contradicts Human Chimp Ancestry
Was Lucy Our Ape-like Ancestor? | Creation Museum
More Evidence Lucy Was Just an Ape | The Institute for Creation Research (icr.org)
Neanderthals—Where Do They Fit in the Bible’s History? | Answers in Genesis
The Guardian – Giant Head found in Chinese Well Forces Scientists to Rethink Evolutionary Theory
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.