The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 ArgumentsWilliams, William A. (William Asbury)
Religion
The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 Arguments
Williams, William A. (William Asbury)
Evolution
The earliest records show man was civilized. He lived in houses, cities
and towns, read and wrote, and engaged in commerce and industry. To be
sure, he did not have the inventions of modern times. If all these were
necessary, then there was no civilization prior to the 20th century.
Prof. J. Arthur Thompson, of Aberdeen, an evolutionist, says: “Modern
research is leading us away from the picture of primitive man as
brutish, dull, lascivious and bellicose. There is more justification
for regarding primitive man as clever, kindly, adventurous and
inventive.”
It is admitted that cannibalism was not primeval. The two great
revolting crimes of barbarism, cannibalism and human sacrifices, only
prevailed when man had fallen to the lowest depths, not when he had
risen out of savagery to the heights. The assertion that man was
originally a brute, savage and uncivilized is pure fiction, unsupported
by the facts. The original civilization of mankind supports the Bible,
and upsets evolution.
6. THE MENDELIAN INHERITANCE LAW
The unity of the human race is further established by Mendel’s
Inheritance Discovery on which evolutionists so much rely. G. Mendel,
an experimenter, found that when he crossed a giant variety of peas
with a dwarf variety, the off-spring were all tall. The giants were
called “dominant”; the disappearing dwarfs, “recessive”. But among the
second generation of this giant offspring, giants and dwarfs appeared
in the proportion of 3 to 1. But when these dwarfs were
self-fertilized, successive generations were _all_ dwarfs. The
recessive character was not lost, but appeared again. Experiments with
flowers likewise show that the recessive color will reappear.
Also experiments with the interbreeding of animals have shown similar
results. The recessive or disappearing characteristics, or the
disappearing variety, will appear again, in some subsequent generation,
and sometimes becomes permanent. This law prevails widely in nature,
and the recessive traits appear with the dominant traits. “If
rose-combed fowl were mated with single-combed fowl, the offspring were
all rose-combed, but when these rose-combed fowl were mated, the
offspring were again rose-combed and single-combed.... If gray rabbits
were mated with black rabbits, their hybrids were all gray, the black
seemingly disappearing, but when the second generation were mated, the
progeny were again grays and blacks.”—God or Gorilla—p. 278. _The
recessive character always reappears._
Apply these widely prevalent laws to dominant man and his recessive
alleged brute ancestor. The simian characteristics would appear in some
generations, if not in many. We would expect many offspring _to have
the recessive character of the ape_, and we ought not to be surprised,
if some recessive stock became permanent.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account