 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
CIVILIZATIONS RETREAT
The Advanced Art in Caves
Evolutionists maintain that some 30-40,000 years ago in Europe, and in a rather earlier period in Africa, so-called ape-like humans experienced a sudden process of transition, and suddenly acquired the ability to think and produce things, just like modern human beings. This is because archaeological findings from that period offer significant evidence that the theory of evolution cannot explain. According to Darwinist claims, the technology of stone implements, which had remained unchanged for almost 200,000 years, was suddenly replaced by a more advanced and rapidly developing hand-crafted technology. So-called primitive man, who had descended from the trees and begun to modernize only shortly before, suddenly developed artistic talents and began carving or painting pictures of extraordinary beauty and sophistication on cave walls and produced exceedingly beautiful decorative objects such as necklaces and bracelets. What happened to cause such development? How and why did “primitive hominids” acquire such artistic ability? Evolutionist scientists have no explanation as to how this might have come about, though they do propose various hypotheses. The evolutionist Roger Lewin describes the difficulties Darwinists face on this subject in his book The Origin of Modern Humans: “Perhaps because the still incomplete archeological record is equivocal at best, scholars respond to these questions in very different ways.”5 However, the archaeological findings reveal that man has had a cultural understanding for as long as he has existed. From time to time, that understanding may have advanced, retreated, or undergone abrupt changes. But that does not mean that any evolutionary process took place, rather that cultural developments and changes occurred. The appearance of works of art that evolutionists describe as “sudden,” doesn’t demonstrate any biological human progress (especially not in terms of intellectual ability). People at the time may have experienced various societal changes, and their artistic and productive understanding may have altered, but this does not constitute evidence of any transition from the primitive to the modern.
The contradiction between archaeological remains left by people in the past and the anatomical and biological remains that should exist—according to evolutionists—once again invalidates Darwinist claims on this subject. (For detailed evidence that scientifically demolishes the supposed human family tree, which is Darwinism’s fundamental claim, see Darwinism Refuted by Harun Yahya.) Evolutionists claim that humans’ cultural development must be directly proportional to biological development. For example, men must first express their emotions through simple drawings, then develop these further until their gradual development eventually reaches a peak of artistic achievement. However, early artistic remains from human history totally undermine that assumption. The cave paintings, carvings and reliefs widely regarded as the first examples of art, prove that human beings of that era possessed a very superior aesthetic understanding. Scientists carrying out research in caves evaluate these pictures as some of the most important and valuable works in the history of art. The shading in these pictures, the use of perspective and the fine lines employed, the depth of feeling expertly reflected in the reliefs, and the aesthetic patterns that emerge as the sunlight strikes the carvings—are all features that evolutionists are unable to explain because, according to the Darwinist view, such a development should have emerged very much later. Many cave paintings found in France, Spain, Italy, China, India, in parts of Africa and various other regions of the world provide important information about mankind’s past cultural structure. The style and coloring techniques employed in these pictures are of such quality as to astonish researchers. Even so, Darwinist scientists evaluate these pictures through their own prejudices, interpreting these works in a biased manner so as to fit in with their evolutionary fairy tales. They claim that beings who had yet to attain the status of modern man drew pictures of animals they either feared or hunted, and did so in the exceedingly primitive conditions of the caves in which they lived. Yet the techniques these works employ show that their artists possessed a very deep understanding, and were able to depict it in a most impressive manner. The painting techniques employed also show that they did not live under primitive conditions at all. In addition, these paintings on cave walls are no evidence that people of the time lived in those caves. The artists may have lived in elaborate shelters nearby, but chose to create their images on the cave walls. With what emotions and thoughts they selected what to represent is something known only to the artist. Much speculation has been produced regarding these pictures, of which the most unrealistic interpretation is that they were made by beings who were still in a primitive state. Indeed, a report published on the BBC’s Science web page on 22 February, 2000, contained the following lines regarding cave paintings: . . . we have always marvelled at them, but thought that they were made by primitive people . . . But according to two scientists working in South Africa, this view of the ancient painters is totally wrong. They believe the paintings are evidence of a complex and modern society.6
If many of our present-day artworks were to be analyzed with the same logic in thousands of years’ time, a number of debates might arise over whether 21st-century society was a primitive tribal one or an advanced civilization. If undamaged pictures by modern artists were discovered, 5,000 years on, and if no written documentation regarding the present day had survived, what would people of the future think about our own age? If people of the future discovered works by Van Gogh or Picasso and judged them from an evolutionist perspective, how would they regard our modern society? Would the landscapes of Claude Monet inspire comments like “Industry had not yet developed, and people led an agricultural way of life,” or comments along the lines of “People still unable to read or write communicated by way of exaggerated blocks of color”? Would the abstract pictures of Wassily Kandinsky lead them to any insights about our present-day society? The Superior Painting Technique in Cave Art In the French Pyrenees, the Niaux Cave is filled with most impressive pictures drawn by people who lived in prehistoric times. Carbon dating performed on these paintings show that they were completed around 14,000 years ago. The Niaux Cave paintings were discovered in 1906 and have been examined in great detail ever since. The most decorated portion of the cave is a side chamber formed by a high cavity, in a dark section known as the Salon Noir. In his book The Origin of Modern Humans, Roger Lewin makes the following comment about this section, with its images of bison, horses, deer and ibexes: "... arranged in panels and giving the impression of foresight and deliberation in their execution." 7
One important element about these pictures that has attracted the most interest of scientists is the painting technique employed. Research has shown that the artists obtained special compounds by mixing natural and local ingredients. No doubt that this indicates an ability to think, plan and produce far beyond the reach of any beings still in a primitive state. Lewin describes this painting technique thus: The painting materials—pigments and mineral extenders—were carefully selected by Upper Paleolithic people and ground to within 5 to 10 micrometers to produce a specific mix. The black pigment, as had been suspected, was charcoal and manganese dioxide. But the real interest was in the extenders, of which there seemed to be four distinct recipes, which the researchers number one through four. Extenders help to bring out the color of the pigment and, as their name implies, add bulk to the paint without diluting the color. The four recipes for extenders used at Niaux were talc; a mixture of baryte and potassium feldspar; potassium feldspar alone; and potassium feldspar mixed with an excess of biotite. Clottes and his colleagues experimented with some of these extenders and found them to be extremely effective. 8 This highly advanced technique is evidence that no being that can be described as primitive ever existed in the past. Ever since Man first came into existence, he has been a superior being, with the ability to think, speak, reason, understand, analyze, plan and produce. It is completely irrational and illogical to claim that people who used extender to color their paintings and who successfully mixed such substances as talc, baryte, potassium feldspar and biotite to obtain such extenders had only recent parted ways with apes and become civilized.
The Works Found in the Blombos Cave
Discoveries during excavations in the Blombos Caves on the coast of South Africa once again overturned the scenario of human evolution. The Daily Telegraph covered the story under the headline “Stone Age Man Wasn’t So Dumb.” Various newspapers and magazines also carried the story, stating that “theories about prehistoric man need to be completely changed.” For example, BBC News reported that, “Scientists say the discovery shows that modern ways of thinking developed far earlier than we think.”9
Found in the Blombos caves were pieces of ochre dating back 80-100,000 years. It was conjectured that they were used for painting the body and in other works of art. Prior to this discovery, scientists had suggested that evidence of the human capacity for thought, understanding and production had emerged 35,000 years ago at the earliest. These new findings totally demolished that supposition. People of that time, whom evolutionists had described as primitive and even as semi-apes, possessed the ability to understand and produce, just like modern humans.
Stunning Pictures in the Chauvet Cave Paintings discovered in the Chauvet Cave in 1994 caused an enormous reaction in the scientific world. Before that, works of art in Ardèche, the 20,000-year-old images at Lascaux and the 17,000-year-old works in Altamira in Spain had all attracted considerable attention. But the images in Chauvet were a great deal older than these. Carbon-dating revealed that these paintings were around 35,000 years old. The following comment appeared in National Geographic magazine: The first photographs captivated specialists and the public alike. For decades scholars had theorized that art had advanced in slow stages from primitive scratchings to lively, naturalistic renderings… Approximately twice as old as those in the more famous caves, Chauvet’s images represented not the culmination of prehistoric art but its earliest known beginnings.10
16,500-Year-Old Astronomical Plans in Lascaux As a result of his studies, Dr. Michael Rappengluck, a researcher from Munich University, revealed that the pictures painted on the walls of the famous Lascaux Caves in central France had an astronomical significance. He reconstructed the figures on the cave walls on computer, using the photogrammetry technique, which showed that the geometrical curves, circles, angles and straight lines that emerged might all have a special significance. All values relating to ecliptic angle, the angle of deviation of the equinox, the regular movements of the stars, the diameter and radius of the Sun and Moon, and the distortions and curvature in the universe were added to the computer’s calculations. As a result, these lines were seen to refer to various constellations of stars and specific lunar motions. BBC News reported the following information in its Science section: A prehistoric map of the night sky has been discovered on the walls of the famous painted caves at Lascaux in central France. The map, which is thought to date back 16,500 years, shows three bright stars known today as the Summer Triangle. A map of the Pleiades star cluster has also been found among the Lascaux frescoes… Discovered in 1940, the walls show the artistic talents of our distant ancestors. But the drawings may also demonstrate their scientific knowledge as well.11
According to Darwinists’ claims, the people who painted these pictures had only just descended from the trees. Their intellectual development had not yet even started. However, both these pictures’ artistic value and results of the latest research totally invalidate these claims. Whoever left these pictures possessed a very superior aesthetic understanding, a developed artistic technique—and scientific knowledge.
Reliefs and Pictures in North Africa Amaze Evolutionists 
These giraffe reliefs, some 7,000 years old, were created so perfectly as to give the impression that the herd is in motion. Clearly, this image is the work of thinking people, capable of making judgments and expressing themselves, and with an understanding of art. This 7,000-year-old picture also shows a man playing a musical instrument. The recent photograph to the side shows a member of the Dzu tribe from Botswana playing a similar instrument. The fact is, a musical instrument similar to that used 7,000 years ago is still in use today! This is another striking example that demolishes Darwinist claims. Civilization does not always advance, as Darwinists maintain; sometimes it may remain the same for thousands of years. While this man keeps playing a venerable instrument that has existed for the past 7,000 years, on the other side of the world, digital symphonies are being composed using the most advanced computer technology. And both cultures co-exist at the same time.
Catal Huyuk, Regarded as the First City
in History, Generally agreed to date back to 9,000 BC, Catal Huyuk is described as one of the first cities known to history. Its first discoveries initiated great debates in the world of archaeology, proving the invalidity of evolutionist claims once again. The archaeologist James Mellart describes how the advanced state of the region quite amazed him: The amount of technological specialization at Catal Huyuk is one of the striking features in this highly developed society which was obviously in the vanguard of Neolithic progress . . . How for example, did they polish a mirror of obsidian, a hard volcanic glass, without scratching it and how did they drill holes through stone beads (including obsidian), holes so small that no find modern steel needle can penetrate? When and where did they learn to smelt copper and lead . . . ? 12 These findings showed that the inhabitants of Catal Huyuk possessed an understanding of urban life, were capable of planning, design and calculation, and that their artistic understanding was far more advanced than had been thought. Professor Ian Hodder, current leader of the excavation team, states that these findings obtained totally invalidate evolutionist claims. He says that they have unearthed an astonishing art whose origins were unclear and notes that it was very difficult to account for the geographical position of Catal Huyuk—which, according to Hodder, has no direct geographical link to areas known to be settled at the time. The frescoes discovered are very advanced for the period. He says that after enquiring why and how these people attained such an elevated artistic level, the real question is how the group of people achieved such a stunning cultural success. So far as we know, he says, there was no evolution in the cultural development achieved at Catal Huyuk, where such major works of art emerged spontaneously and from nothing. 13
400,000-Year-Old Spears That Astonished Evolutionists 
In 1995, the German archaeologist Hartmut Thieme discovered a number of wooden remains in Schöningen, Germany. These had been carefully crafted spears—in other words, the world’s oldest known hunting tools. This discovery came as a great surprise to evolutionists, in whose view big-game hunting occurred about 40,000 years ago, when modern humans supposedly first appeared. To make the Clacton and Lehringen spears, which had been found earlier, fit with the evolutionary lie, they had been downgraded to digging-sticks or snow-probes.14 Actually, however, the Schöningen spears went back a great deal further—to around 400,000 years ago. In addition, their age was so certain that Robin Dennell, one of the Sheffield University archaeologists whose paper was published in Nature magazine, stated that it was impossible to alter their date or to engage in false interpretation of them: But the Schöningen discoveries are unambiguously spears: to regard them as snow-probes or digging-sticks is like claiming that power drills are paperweights.15 One reason why these spears so surprised evolutionist scientists is the misconception that the supposedly primitive humans of that time lacked the ability to manufacture such objects. Yet these spears are the product of a mind able to calculate and plan in stages. The trunk of a spruce tree around 30 years old was used for each spear, and its tip was made from the base, where the wood is hardest. Each spear was designed in equal proportions and—just as with modern criteria—its center of gravity was one-third of the way back from the tip. In the face of all this information, Robin Dennell comments: These represent considerable investment of time and skill—in selecting an appropriate tree, in roughing out the design and in the final stages of shaping. In other words, these hominids were not living within a spontaneous ‘five-minute culture’, acting opportunistically in response to immediate situations. Rather, we see considerable depth of planning, sophistication of design, and patience in carving the wood, all of which have been attributed only to modern humans.16 Thieme, who discovered the spears, says: The use of sophisticated spears as early as the Middle Pleistocene may mean that many current theories on early human behaviour and culture must be revised.17 As Hartmut Thieme and Robin Dennell state, Darwinist claims concerning the history of mankind do not reflect the facts. The truth is, mankind never underwent evolution. Backward civilizations and highly developed advanced ones both existed in the past. Traces of Civilization on Göbekli Tepe
Scientists described as “extraordinary and peerless” the findings obtained during excavations on Göbekli Tepe near Urfa, Turkey. These were giant, T-shaped pillars, taller than a man and 20 meters in diameter, with carved animal reliefs on them. They had been arranged in a circle. The feature that truly impressed the scientific world was the age of the site, which had been constructed 11,000 years ago. According to the evolutionists’ claim, the people of the time must have constructed this imposing site using only primitive stone tools. According to this misconception, the engineering marvel in question was the work of hunter-gatherers using the most primitive implements 11,000 years ago. This, of course, is quite unbelievable. Professor Klaus Schmidt, leader of the excavation team on Göbekli Tepe sets out this fact stating that people alive at that time appear to have had the capacity for thought. Contrary to what is imagined, Schmidt states, these people were not primitive and must not be regarded as ape-like creatures, recently descended from the trees and attempting to construct a civilization. In terms of intelligence, they appear to have been just like us. 18 Schmidt, an archaeologist, carried out a small experiment to determine how those giant pillars could have been transported under the conditions of the time, and how they were shaped. He and his team sought to carve a giant block of rock without the assistance of machinery, using only the primitive tools that prehistoric humans must have used. Then they attempted to carry it a short distance. Part of the team began working on the stone with logs, ropes and muscle power, making simple and natural winches. Meanwhile, others attempted to create a cavity in the base using stone hand-tools, just like the master masons of 9,000 years ago. (The evolutionist view of history believes that since there were no iron implements in those days, Stone-Age men used hard flints.) The workers trying to carve the stone labored non-stop for two hours, and all they obtained was a vague line. The team trying to move the stone block weighing the same as 12 men worked hard for four hours, but only managed to move seven meters, or roughly 20 feet. This simple experiment revealed that hundreds of workers would have to labor for months to form a single circular area of stones. Clearly, people of that time must have used highly advanced expertise, rather than the primitive methods suggested by evolutionist scientists. Another inconsistency in the evolutionist timeline is that they name the period when these works were produced the “pre-pottery Neolithic Age.” According to this unrealistic interpretation, people of that time hadn’t yet achieved the technology to make pottery. Knowing that they made statues, transported giant stones, turned them into attractive pillars, carved reliefs of animals on them, decorated their walls with pictures and employed engineering and architectural knowledge, can we claim they didn’t know how to make earthenware pots?
That deceptive claim is persistently reiterated only to defend evolutionist preconceptions. No doubt the artifacts in question show that their makers possessed far more advanced knowledge, technology and civilization than was previously imagined. This in turn reveals that they were not all as primitive as claimed. Indeed, an article in the Turkish magazine Bilim ve Teknik says that the Göbekli Tepe discoveries expose a widespread misconception regarding the history of mankind: “These new data reveal a major misconception with regard to humanity’s history.” 19 That error lies in interpreting history in the light of the evolution deception.
Dental Treatment Using Professional Techniques
Excavation carried out in Pakistan revealed that more than 8,000 years ago, dentists drilled teeth to remove decay. During the digs, Professor Andrea Cucina of the University of Missouri-Columbia noticed tiny holes, around 2.5 mm in diameter, on molars between 8,000 and 9000 years old. Impressed by the perfection of these holes, Cucina expanded his research by having his team examine the holes under an electron microscope. They found these tiny holes’ sides were too perfectly rounded to be caused by bacteria. In other words, these were not natural cavities, but the result of artificial intervention, for the purposes of treatment. None of the teeth showed any sign of decay. That, as New Scientist magazine put it, "could simply be testimony to the skill of the prehistoric dentists." 20 At this time, according to the evolutionist doctrine,, human beings had only recently diverged from apes. They were living under exceedingly primitive conditions and had only just learned to make earthenware pots, and then only in certain regions. How did people in such primitive circumstances manage to drill such perfect cavities in teeth that required dental treatment, even though they possessed no technology? Evidently these people were not primitive, and neither were the conditions in which they lived. On the contrary, they possessed the knowledge to diagnose disease and produce methods of treatment, and the technical means to use these methods successfully. Once again, this invalidates the Darwinist claim that societies evolve from the primitive to the modern. Ancient People’s Passion for Music The interest that people living some 100,000 years ago displayed in music is another indication that they shared almost the exact same tastes as we do today. The oldest known musical instrument, recovered at Haua Fteah, Libya, is a fossil flute made out of a bird’s bone and estimated at between 70,000 and 80,000 years old. 21Prolom II is a site from the Eastern Crimea where 41 phalange whistles were found. 22This site dates back to between 90,000 and 100,000 years ago.23 However, the musical knowledge of the people from that time goes still further. Musicologist Bob Fink analyzed a different flute, made from a bear’s thighbone, found in July 1995 by the archaeologist Ivan Turk in a cave in northern Yugoslavia. Fink proved that this flute, determined by radiocarbon tests to be between 43,000 and 67,000 years old, produced four notes, and had half and full tones. This discovery shows that Neanderthals used the seven-note scale—the basic formula of today’s Western music. Examining the flute, Fink saw that the distance between its second and third holes was double that between the third and fourth. This means that the first distance represents a whole tone, and the distance next to it a half-tone. Fink wrote, “These three notes . . . are inescapably diatonic and will sound like a near-perfect fit within any kind of standard diatonic scale, modern or antique.” This reveals that Neanderthals were people with an ear for and knowledge of music. 24
These artifacts and archaeological discoveries raise a number of questions that Darwinism, which maintains that human beings and apes are descended from a common ancestor, cannot answer. For example, as for the ape-like creatures they claim lived tens of thousands of years ago, merely grunting and living an animal lifestyle—why and how did they begin to become social beings? This is a major dilemma for evolutionists. The theory of evolution has no scientific and rational answers as to why these ape-like creatures descended from the trees to the ground, how they managed to stand on two legs, and how their intelligence and abilities developed. The “explanations” are nothing more than preconceptions and fairy tales based solely on fantasy. How did monkeys leaping from branch to branch decide to descend to the ground? If you ask evolutionists, they will say that this was because of climatic factors. The theory of evolution won’t be able to provide a rational and logical answer to the first questions that come to mind. Why did other monkey choose to remain in the branches when they could have imitated these ones who descended to the ground? Or, why did these climatic factors influence only some apes? or What prevented other apes from descending from the trees under the same climatic influences? If you ask how it was that monkeys descended to the ground and began to walk on two legs, evolutionists will provide different accounts. Some will say, for instance, that these ape-like creatures decided to walk upright on two legs, the better to scout for powerful enemies. Yet none of these answers are scientific. First and foremost, there is no such thing as the evolution of bipedalism. Human beings walk upright on two feet—a very special form of locomotion not seen in any other species. One most important point that needs to be clarified is that bipedalism is not an evolutionary advantage. The way monkeys move is much easier, faster, and more efficient than man's bipedal stride.
Man cannot move by jumping from tree to tree like a chimpanzee, nor run at a speed of 125 kilometers per hour like a cheetah. On the contrary, since we walk on two feet, we move much more slowly on the ground. For the same reason, we are one of the least protected of all species in nature. According to the logic of the theory of evolution, monkeys should not have been inclined to adopt a bipedal stride. Instead, humans should have become quadrupedal in order to survive and become the fittest. Another impasse for evolutionary claims is that bipedalism does not serve Darwinism’s “gradual development” model, which constitutes the basis of evolution and requires that there should be a “compound” or missing-link stride between bipedalism and quadrupedalism. However, with the computerized research he conducted in 1996, the British paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton showed that such a compound stride was not possible. Crompton reached the conclusion that a living being can either walk upright, or on all fours. 25 Any type of “hybrid” stride between the two is impossible because it would involve excessive energy consumption. Thus a half-bipedal being cannot exist. How did supposedly primitive beings develop intelligent social behavior? The answer, according to evolutionist nonsense, is that by living in groups, they thus developed intelligent and social behavior. Yet gorillas, chimpanzees, monkeys and many other animal species also live in groups or herds; and none of these has developed intelligent and social behavior in the way that humans have. None of them have constructed monuments, taken any interest in astronomy or created works of art; because intelligent creative behavior is unique to human beings. All those artifacts that have survived from the past were made by humans with real artistic ability. The idea that these people lived under primitive conditions is refuted by archaeological facts.
Findings That Refute the Evolutionist Picture
of Evidence provided in The Hidden History of the Human Race: Forbidden Archeology, by the archaeologists Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson, overturns the picture of the evolution of mankind as advocated by evolutionists. This book documents remains from totally unexpected—from the evolutionist viewpoint—periods in history. In the 1950s, for example, Thomas E. Lee, an anthropologist at the National Museum of Canada, carried out excavations at Sheguiandah, on Manitoulin Island in Lake Huron. There he found implements in a layer of glacial till, a deposit of sand and gravel left by receding glaciers. When it emerged that these were between 65,000 and 125,000 years old, the publication of the results of his research was postponed—because, according to the misconception dominating the scientific world, human beings had first arrived in North America from Siberia only 120,000 years ago, and it was impossible to claim that this happened any earlier. Another example provided in the book is archaeologist Carlos Ameghino, who discovered stone tools in an undisturbed 3-million-year-old Pliocene formation at Miramar, Argentina. From the same layers, he extracted the femur of a toxodon, an extinct South American hoofed mammal. Embedded in the femur was a stone arrowhead or lance point. Later, another researcher found a piece of a human jawbone in the same formation. Yet according to Darwinists, human beings capable of making stone balls and arrowheads emerged only 100,000 to 150,000 years ago. Therefore, any bones and arrowheads dating back 3 million years are phenomena that evolutionists are unable to explain. This shows, yet again, that the theory of evolution is incompatible with the scientific facts. 26 In his book Ancient Traces, the British researcher and writer Michael Baigent describes how a gold chain between 260 and 320 million years old was discovered in 1891. It emerged that this chain was of eight-carat gold, which is eight parts gold mixed with sixteen parts of another metal. The middle of the chain,—which emerged from inside a piece of coal—was loosened, although the two ends were firmly embedded. Excellent imprints of the loosened section remained in the coal. All this shows that the chain had to be as old as the coal itself. The age of the coal seams in which the chain was found was 260 to 320 million years.27 The discovery of a gold chain, from a time when evolutionists maintain that human beings did not yet even exist, totally demolished the history of mankind they’ve drawn up. The fact that a society uses jewelry and produces decorative items is proof that its citizens enjoyed a civilized life. Moreover, making a gold chain requires both technical expertise and equipment. No regular gold chain can be made from gold ore using stone tools alone. It’s obvious that people living millions of years before our own day knew about jewelry-making and took pleasure from beautiful things. Another finding that overturns the theory of historical evolution is a piece of a nail estimated to be 387 million years old. According to a report by Sir David Brewster of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, the nail was found in a piece of sandstone. The seam from which the stone was taken dates back to the Early Devonian Period— making it around 387 million years old.28 These findings, of which a great many more could be given, show that man is not a half-animal organism, as evolutionists would have us believe, and has never led an animalistic life. After listing similar examples, Michael Baigent goes on to make the following comment: . . . clearly there is no possibility that any of this data can be accommodated into the conventional scientific understanding of the earth’s history. . . In fact, this evidence—if it can be substantiated even in just one of the cases we have reviewed—indicates that humans, in a modern form, have been walking upon this planet for a very long time indeed. 29 The history of archaeology is full of such discoveries, in the face of which the “conventional” evolutionist mindset that Baigent describes is in a hopeless situation. But the evolutionist mindset also carefully keeps these important specimens away from the public’s gaze, and ignores them itself. No matter how much Darwinists strive to keep their ideology alive, the mounting evidence shows that evolution is a lie and that Creation is a fact that cannot be denied. God created Man out of nothing, breathed His spirit into him, and taught him what he did not know. Through God’s inspiration, man has lived a human life ever since he first came into existence.
Discoveries at the “Ein Gev I” Excavations Refute the Thesis of the Evolution of History Research reveals that humans living thousands of years ago used implements similar to those used in rural areas today. Millstones for grinding cereals, a stone mortar and sickles were found in the foundations of a hut that dates back to 15,000 BCE at the excavation site known as “Ein Gev I” in present-day Palestine. The oldest of these implements date back to before 50,000 BCE. 30 All the objects found in these digs reveal that mankind’s needs have remained much the same at all times. The solutions Man has developed have been very similar to one another, in direct proportion to the technology of the time. Tools for harvesting and grinding cereals—the same implements most needed in rural areas today—were also used in the period in question. 5 Roger Lewin, The Origin of Modern Humans,
New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1993, p. 116.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
