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
Since a modern Eskimo skull has been shown by a distinguished scientist
to have the same appearance and peculiarities as the Heidelberg jaw, it
is easy to believe that this jaw can be duplicated in many graveyards.
Greater abnormalities, in great numbers, can be found in the skeletons
of modern man. Without doubt, this jaw belongs to modern man, and has
no evidential value at all in favor of evolution.
We count these relics normal, in our arguments, because evolutionists
do. If they are not normal, they are the remains of modern man and
brutes and their whole argument falls to the ground.
3. The Piltdown Man (or Fake). The next fragments of bones, in
chronological order, upon which evolutionists rely to prove their
impossible theory, has been called the Piltdown man. It has been more
truthfully called the Piltdown fake. Dr. Chapin gravely tells us
(Social Evolution, p. 67): “During the years 1912, a series of
fragments of a human skull and a jaw bone were found associated with
eolithic implements and the bones of extinct mammals in Pleistocene
deposits on a plateau, 80 feet above the river bed, at Piltdown,
Fletching, Sussex, Eng.....The remains were of great importance. The
discoverers regard this relic as a specimen of a distinct genus of the
human species and it has been called Eoanthropus Dawsoni. This extinct
man lived in Europe hundreds of thousands of years ago.” We have passed
over 200,000 to 300,000 years since the Heidelberg man, that have not
yielded a scrap of bone, though according to the theory, countless
millions of ape-men must have lived in various stages of development,
in that great stretch of time. Why were not some of them preserved?
Simply because there were no ape-men. There are countless relics of
apes, but none of ape-men. Even Wells says: “At a great open-air camp
at Solutre, where they seem to have had annual gatherings for many
centuries, it is estimated there are the bones of 100,000 horses.”
Would we not expect as many bones of ape-men? While Wells says the
bones of 100,000 horses were found in a single locality, Dr. Ales
Hrdlicka says that the bones of 200,000 prehistoric horses were found
in another place. Why should we not find, for the same reason, the
bones of millions of ape-men and ape-women in 750,000 years? Instead of
millions we have the alleged fragments of 4, all of which are of a very
doubtful character.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account