HUMAN EVOLUTION, ORIGINS OF MAN, MANKIND, ANCIENT HISTORICAL RECORDS, HOMO ERECTUS, HOMO SAPIANS, HOMO HABILIS, CHARLES DARWIN, BIBLE

HUMAN “EVOLUTION’ FACTS

Hi guys (and gals)!

How has this past week treated everyone? I had some real ups and downs…stress at work, fun with my grandson, stress at home, good accomplishments at work, final revisions on my novel…Wow! A lot is going on in my life, lol! I hope your week has been just as full, a little less stressful, but filled with the good things of life.

Talk about ‘filling up’, I just want to clear up some wrong thoughts and ideas about human “evolution”. For all who have attended secular schools anytime since the late 1940’s, evolution has been taught in one form or another. Many people believe that evolution is a fact because of this. So let’s go over the most recent “evidence” that supposedly supports evolution.

Since we cannot go back in time and observe where mankind came from, the origin of man is considered historical science, not observable science. The Bible accurately records the origin of man but other historical records of ancient man only go back about 5,000 years. Interesting that this actually aligns with the

unaltered timescale recorded in the Bible. But there is one other avenue to look at that will either support evolution or the Bible; the fossil record.

“The fossil record, in its entirety, clearly shows:

1 Fossils that are indistinguishable from modern humans are found in strata that secularists believe to be around 4.5 million years old. Yet, the fossils of creatures that evolutionists believe to be our apelike progenitors (predecessors)  are estimated to be more recent. How can man predate his own supposed ancestor?

2 A supposed transitional form for humans called

Homo erectus demonstrates morphological consistency (didn’t change) throughout its entire alleged two-million-year history with no evidence of H. erectus evolving from or into something else. (Isn’t evolution one thing changing into another?)

3 Anatomically modern Homo sapiens (us), Neanderthal, archaic Homo sapiens, and Homo erectus all lived as contemporaries at one time or another. These were all people as we define modern people today, 100% human, with only subtle “ethnic” differences in their anatomy.

4 Homo habilis fossils are contemporary with Homo erectus fossils. Therefore, H. habilis could not have

evolved into H. erectus. Plus, some evolutionary paleoanthropologists regard this “species” as possessing an invalid name since the fossils are so sparse and of circuitous origin.

5 There are no fossils of Australopithecus or any other primate stock in the proper alleged time frame to serve as evolutionary ancestors to humans.”¹  

Creation and The Flood is the best explanation of the fossil record. It is reasonable and logical to conclude that the fossil record and ancient human history concur with the timeline recorded in the Bible. 

Even Charles Darwin—the father of evolution—“questioned his own hypothesis of origins: ‘Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?’”² 

Hmmm something to think about.

Until next time, God bless and take care,

Willow Dressel

References:

^1-2http://www.icr.org/article/8832