washed due to articles in leading na tional magazines on the subject But let’s take a further look at the vain reasoning of Evolution. Reference to the findings of anthropology would be unnecessary were it not for the fact that it is so repeatedly stated that links in the evolutionary scale between the ape or some other lower anthropoid and man have been discovered from time to time. But no such “missing link” has ever come to light that sci entific evidence could accept. Were the theory of evolution true, literally thous ands of such skeleton remains should have been discovered by now. The claims of anthropologists in re gard to such “missing links” are based upon some skeleton remain; which have come to light at various times. The following examples will serve to illustrate the basis of these claims; Best known is the Java ape man — reconstructed -from a piece of skull, a thighbone and two teeth. Found by Du bois, at different times, in an old river bed in the years 1891 and 1892. Dubois also found remains of a true man at same time but did not reveal this un til 26 years later. All discussions by men in this field, were made therefore without important evidence which he withheld. The so-called Piltdown man —found in gravel pit in 1908 was a similar story as to parts from which reconstruction was made. Then the (Continued on next page) 11
I n o u r p r e v io u s discussion on evolu tion, we dealt first with the fact of comparative anatomy, showing that there is absolutely no proof that the higher forms come from the lower. As a matter of fact, the reverse is true — the higher break down into lower forms. Now the second idea is what is known as embryonic recapitulation. In this thought is put forth the theory that in the development of the tiny life that the small embryo has definite characteristics of fish and mammals. True science again points her finger, and this time, to the additional fact that any resemblance is merely super ficial, and not, by any means, realistic. One school text asserts. “The simi larities in embryos of humans and ani mals do not seem strange if we as sume,” notice the word “assume,” “they are all descendants of a common ancestor.”. This is a tragic assumption to put to our young people, declaring that at various times the human em bryo resembles a fish, an amphibian, and a mammal as man supposedly evolved. If this theory were true the embryo should appear as a monkey in one phase, but it is never ape like what soever. Assumption is not true science and should never be treated as such. And yet, evolution, based upon as sumption, is taught to our young folk resulting in millions being brain
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker