Man's Predecessor?

By Wilfredo Hernandez

Comments of Reports Released by the Philadelphia Inquirer

The first report was titled "Scientists in Ethiopia find another predecessor of man". It was reported that "fossil-hunters have recovered the partial remains of a previously unknown, 2.5 million year-old creature". The first thing they mention is their assumption that the creature (presumed to be Man's missing link) is 2.5 million years old. They also state that "it appears to be the earliest evidence of ancient hominids (two-legged humanlike creatures) that used stone tools to butcher animal carcasses and prepare meat". Did you know that the evolutionist theory of the age of the Earth being millions of years old came before these people ever had dating methods? Evolutionists have made GREAT assumptions with these methods in order to make the data fit their theories, instead of being the other way around. There are many dating methods and not two of them will agree on the age of objects. Do you also know that only half of the dates are ever published because evolutionists often find that dating methods prove the age of objects such as rock and fossils more in accord with what the Bible says (thousands of years instead of millions of years)? These are questions that we have to put in brackets when we hear an evolutionist saying the age of these bones being 2.5 million years. The report also said that stone tools were found in the ossuary (bone) finding. They immediately believe that the bones and skulls belonged to apelike creatures who learned how to use their tools to butcher animal carcasses and prepare meat. This is not the first time that scientists have found stone tools right next to bones and smashed skulls of apelike creatures. An example of this was the finding of Peking Man in a cave in north China. Scientists believe that Peking Man is an example of apelike creatures who used stone tools to prepare food, disregarding the possibility of the opposite being true (stone tools used on apelike creatures). Did you know that we still have cultures in our days that eat monkey? As a matter of fact monkey brains are considered a delicacy. Being this said, looking at their archeological evidence and using their same method of theory I could as well say that those stone tools were actually used on those apelike creatures by humans who ate them and left the bones that are found today.

I am also amazed at their assumptions of sex (they say the skull and associated jaw belonged to a male) by only looking at it. The jaw is not even attached to the skull and they both appear different than what they have seen before. The jaw and skulls could very well belonged to two totally different creatures whose carcasses were found together.

They are correct in saying that "there is scant fossil evidence from this key evolutionary period". Lack of evidence is the largest problem evolutionist have to prove their theory. Did you know that when Darwin proposed his theory he didn't have fossil evidence to support his belief? He hoped that fossil evidence of transitional life forms would come later to prove his theory... it never did and will never happen. The fossil evidence that we find comes from creatures totally different than what we see today, but evolutionist have not been able to find fossils of transitional life forms that would support their theory. The only thing evolutionist have is the so called model of Lucy which they mention in the report. What they don't tell you is that only 40% of Lucy's bones were found, and that the knee joint (giving it the most humanlike characteristic) was found over a mile away, and that two of the leading evolutionist (sorry, but I don't have their names with me) believe that those are the remains of an upright walking chimpanzee. This is not the first time that evolutionists claim to have found the "missing link". You probably heard of their so called Nebraska Man. This model was based ONLY on a finding of a tooth attached to a piece of jaw (no bones or skulls or anything else) thought to be of the missing link. Out of a tooth, evolutionists had the audacity to give it bones, flesh and hair, they even gave it a mate and published their picture all over the world. They latter found out that the tooth belonged to an extinct pig, and to their bigger embarrassment they later found that the pig wasn't even extinct. You probably heard of Neanderthal Man. This was another model that evolutionist believed to be a hunched man on the way up to become more human. Some scientists now believe that the bones show evidence of vitamin (D) and mineral (Calcium) deficiency, and most likely suffered from Anemia and Rickets (a deficiency disease that affects the young during the period of skeletal growth, characterized by soft and deformed bones). The poor man wasn't on the way up... he was on the way down.

They also confess their "their attempt to fill in the evolutionary gap". They had been sifting the earth for years "hoping to find something like a version of Australopitecus Africanus... what they found instead was an unexpected creature that didn't seem to fit the existing categories". They call this new model A. garhi (from the local word of surprise). It would be funny if they latter found something that would destroy their theory, like the case of Nebraska Man... that would really surprise them. Something interesting is their testimony that "the arm and leg bones found nearby may or may not be from the same species". This reminds me of Lucy's knee joint.

The archeological finding provides additional evidence "indicating butchery of ancient antelope and three-toed horses with stone tools". This supports my theory of animal carcasses (including A. garhi) eaten by humans of the past. I don't need to add anything to their closing statements, "one skull doesn't offer much evidence of a distinct species" and "we can't be sure yet wether all of the new finds belong to a single species, much less a single new one". What an interesting statement! Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York says that "any specimen of this kind is very important because our database for this period of human evolution is generally not very good". The truth is that their database is terrible since they don't have anything to support evolution. Nevertheless, Philip Rightmare of the State University of New York at Binghampton claims that "it seems to me that they have made a convincing case for a new species". That's a rather overstatement considering everything we said before and how inconsistent and conflicting evolutionist can be when looking at the same evidence.

The second report was titled "Evidence of an ancient continental split". It was reported that "volcanic rocks newly discovered in Brazil indicate that an eruption 200 million years ago produced the most widespread lava flow in Earth's history". They claim that this lava flow had the same origin as lava flows found in North America, Africa and Europe. I don't have a problem with the common origin for the lava flow since this supports what is said in the Bible. Genesis conveys the idea that God originally created something like a super continent, "Then God said, 'Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear'; and it was so." (Genesis 1:9 NASB). Nevertheless I don't agree with their claim that the eruption occurred 200 million years ago for the aforementioned reasons. Evolutionists and some scientists base their theory of the 200 million year old lava on dating methods that were built using incredible assumptions. The interpretation of results gathered from their dating methods are based on their initial theory of the earth being millions of years old. Remember that the theory of the Earth's age being millions of years old came before the development of these dating methods. A case in point happened when geologists went out to measure the ages of the lava flows on top and on the bottom of the Grand Canyon using the Rubidium Strontium method. When they dated the lava flow on the bottom of the canyon it dated to about a billion years old. Conventional wisdom tells that the lava flows on top of the canyon should be millions of years younger than the ones on the bottom of the canyon. Therefore if they used the same method to date the top lava flow it should date to about 100 millions years younger. Instead it dated to about 100 millions years older. Results like this clearly demonstrates the poor reliability of these methods. Instead, they argued that the Rubidium Strontium method was unsuitable to date top lava flows. Another case happened when scientists dated the Uranium in the Northern Territories. They used two Uranium methods and a Thorium method which is believed to be the most accurate. When they published their dates, they didn't publish the Thorium dates because they had results back to 0 years. Evolutionists are obviously biased in the interpretation of their tests results in order to prove their point. Events like these made unbiased scientists to date the lava flows in the Grand Canyon. This time they discovered that the entire episode of the lava dams (flows) of the Grand Canyon can easily be reconciled within a time-frame of less than two thousand years and not millions of years as originally thought (See, Evidences for Rapid Formation and Failure of Pleistocene "Lava Dams" of the Western Grand Canyon, Arizona by Dr. Scott H. Rugg and Dr. Steven A. Austin). There's also the example of the eruption of Mount St. Helen where mud flows carved a crack which is 1/40th the size of the Grand Canyon! Most geologists would believe that such a formation with the different layers of rock and earth took millions of years to form, but it all happened in only days! Now imagine how much destruction a flood like the one described in Genesis would do. A flood where "all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened." (Genesis 7:11b NASB). This flood could very well be accompanied by volcanic eruptions, mud flows and pyroclastic flows lasting forty days with catastrophic results, "And the rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights." (Genesis 7:12 NASB). A flood like this was more than capable of dividing the original supercontinent into what we have today in less than a year. The Bible tells that the entire episode of rain, rising flood and receding flood took about a year (nearly 54 weeks). The flood began in Noah’s year 600, month 2, day 17; "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month" (Genesis 7:11a NIV). The entire flood episode ended in Noah’s year 601, month 2, day 27; "And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry." (Genesis 8:14 NIV). Water, flood, mud and lava can do all sorts of catastrophic results. This could even explain why we have so many fossils. Not to say that all fossils originated with the flood, but certainly most of them would. The great flood of the Bible could account for most of our fossil record causing millions of dead things to be buried under rock layers and laid down by water all over the earth.

There are a lot of questions that can be answered with the Bible, nevertheless most people treat Genesis chapters 1 through 11 as a fairy tale, especially Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel. Did you know that if you calculated the volume of Noah's Ark (450-Ft long x 75-Ft wide x 45-Ft deep) and knew the total volume occupied by the animals onboard, there would be more than enough space available even to allow storage of a limited amount of food in the Ark? Noah really didn't need much space for food storage if the animals hibernated as it is believed. Remember also that Noah took two of each KIND, "And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female... You shall take with you of every clean animal by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean two, a male and his female; also of the birds of the sky, by sevens, male and female, to keep offspring alive on the face of all the earth." (Genesis 6:19, 7:2-3 NASB). Did you know that there are far less kinds of animals than there are varieties in the world? For example there is the dog kind, the horse kind, etc... Six thousand years (as calculated by Archbishop Usher when the flood occurred) is more than enough time to get all the varieties of animals that we have today. For example, you have heard how we get different varieties of dogs using breeding methods. This wasn't caused by evolution, instead it was caused by what creationists call "natural selection within boundaries". You can have changes within the dog kind in a short period of time, but never "evolve" the dog kind into the cat kind.

People also think that it takes millions of years for fossils to form when it has been proven that you can petrify things in less than 100 years, all you need is the right conditions. People also wonder how Noah could have fit dinosaurs in the Ark. They don't even realize that the average size of dinosaurs was that of a common sheep and that God could have chosen a small young dinosaurs to come into the ark and not the full grown one. As a matter of fact, the reason of why some dinosaurs grew so big was for the same reason people lived long ages. In the beginning the world was perfect and good, providing ideal conditions to sustain a high quality of life. By the way, did you know that dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible? It is associated with a man named Job who lived after the flood, "Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins, And his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron. He is the first of the ways of God; Let his maker bring near his sword. Surely the mountains bring him food, And all the beasts of the field play there. Under the lotus plants he lies down, In the covert of the reeds and the marsh. The lotus plants cover him with shade; The willows of the brook surround him. If a river rages, he is not alarmed; He is confident, though the Jordan rushes to his mouth. Can anyone capture him when he is on watch, With barbs can anyone pierce his nose?" (Job 40:15-24). This clearly describes something like a Diplodocus or a Brachiosaurus. So, what then happened to the dinosaurs? They obviously died. And that's not hard to believe considering the harsh conditions and lack of food existent after the flood.

Then there is the story about the Tower of Babel, "And they said, 'Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name; lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.'" (Genesis 11:4 NASB). Studying the meaning of the Hebrew words found in the original manuscripts where our Bible was translated from, one can reasonably assume that the so called tower was a stage or pulpit dedicated to the worship of the heavenly bodies. Archeological findings support the claim that these people (Babylonians or Sumerians) were involved in Astrology. Note that the word "is" (...a tower whose top is in the heavens...) is in italics in some versions of the Bible. The same thing is true for the words "may reach" (...whose top may reach unto heaven...). This means that these italic words were not contained in the original Scripture manuscripts, but were added with the purpose of clarifying the meaning of the passage. It is also possible that the early Bible translators did not understand the meaning of the original Hebrew passage saying something like "a pulpit whose top was for the heavens". A reason for the current interpretation of Genesis 11:4 in our Bibles may be due to the fact that these passages from Scripture were translated years before archeologists unearthed the remains of this Sumerian civilization. Ruins of numerous temple-towers, called ziggurats, have been found in the region of Babylon. It is possible that ruins of the great temple-tower to Marduk found in the center of ancient Babylon is the focus of this narrative. We possess descriptions of this tower, recorded by ancient historians, as it stood undamaged and unravaged by time. You can verify what I am saying by reading Genesis 11:4 from an Interlineary Hebrew Bible, and also by visiting the Sumerian exhibits at the Museum of Natural History of the University of Pennsylvania. It is worth noting that real scientific discoveries (and not legal evolution theories) support a literal interpretation of ancient history as told by the Bible. You will find numerous scientific facts, just like this one, which support the belief of God and reliability of the Bible. It is a shame that the scientific community (who is permeated with secularism) will choose to hide discoveries that clearly support the Bible while advertising those that seem to deny God or contradict the Bible. These discoveries even aid with exegesis and better Bible translations. What I like the most is that atheists will probably hate to admit this as another fact supporting the validity and inerrancy of our Bible, and the existence of our Supreme Creator.

Did you know that by definition a scientific method cannot be used to predict the age of the earth or even the origin of the universe? Natural sciences such as Biology (which is the platform for evolution) cannot be used since creation was a singular event. It is not a repeatable event (which lends itself to scientific inquiry) nor is it an unpredictable event (which lends to the laws of probability). Creation is a singular event which lends itself to legal inquiry. Natural science has no place in trying to determine the origin of the universe. All we can do is look at the evidence and conclude which model best fits the evidence.

I could give you explanations for the account given in Genesis chapters 1 through 11 but I can't since my lunch time is over. Of course there are things impossible to explain since God didn't provide details on how everything happened. For example, where did light come from in the first day if He created the sun in day four? I personally believe it came from Himself, "I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life." (John 8:12 NASB). This would make sense when you learn that most civilizations worshiped either the sun or some other heavenly body. God clearly shows His superiority over all creation by producing light necessary to sustain life in the first three days of creation without the need of a sun. Remember that if God provided details for everything we would have ended up with a multiple-volume encyclopedia instead of the Bible we have today. God gave enough information for anyone to believe therefore nobody is without excuse, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." (Romans 1:20 NASB). Given the facts you can choose to believe or not believe in what the Bible says is our origin. After studying both arguments you would need more faith to believe in the theory of evolution than what you would need to believe in God and creation. I was a person who believed in evolution until I decided to hear the claims from the creationist's side and realized the big holes with the theory of evolution. Holes in the fossil record where not only is the so-called missing link still missing. All of the transitional life forms so crucial to evolutionary theory are missing from the fossil record. There are THOUSANDS of missing links, not one! Yet the general public blithely accepts evolution as a fact. Holes against the second law of thermodynamics. This law states that energy is winding down and that matter left to itself tends toward chaos and randomness, not greater organization and complexity. Evolution demands exactly the opposite process, which is observed nowhere in nature. Evolutionists cannot provide a single practical example of functional complexity originating from chance random processes (or disorder by chance). What you have instead is a created universe caused by the unfathomable intelligence of God. Our DNA as well as the document you are reading are examples of created objects transporting information originating from higher forms of information and not from chance. Holes with the origin of life. Evolution offers no answers to the origin of life. It simply pushes the question farther back in time, back to some primordial event in space or an act of spontaneous generation in which life simply sprang from nothing. There's a lot more evidence supporting the Bible accounts of creation and our origin that I would be happy to discuss if you are interested. I would never try to convince you because I can't, that's the work of the Holy Spirit. I had a conversation about this same issue with a friend who believes in the theory of evolution. After going through all the aforementioned arguments, in addition to providing cosmological proofs that shows the age of the earth's magnetic field and the age of the sun of the sun to be in the order of thousands and not millions of years old, he decided not to believe. He even agreed that I had a strong argument but in his words he "felt more comfortable believing in evolution". As a matter of fact, he asked me why would the scientific community hide all these proofs supporting creation. I told him because it had the greatest implications. For example, if there is ape in your ancestors, who sets the rules? You do. But, if there is Adam in your ancestors, who sets the rules? God does. My friend, we are living in the end times. Times prophesied in 2 Peter 3, "Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, 'Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.' For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men... But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up." (2 Peter 3 :3-7, 10 NASB). Do you realize that the last verse shows that the Big Bang hasn't happened? It is yet to come! The verse also shows the present condition of people when denying three things: (1) Christ's return, (2) that God created the Earth and (3) the flood of Noah's days. Some versions of the Bible translate the condition of these people as "willingly are ignorant" (KJV), "willfully forget" (NKJV), "deliberately ignore" (NRSV) and "deliberately forget" (NIV). It can be concluded that is a choice on their part, it has nothing to do with God, to deny the existence of God. Instead of believing the Bible they choose to believe in doctrines such as Humanism, Materialism and Uniformitarianism. Philosophies that have been proven shallow in nature, causing for maladies such as racism, sexual perversion and aggression (like the recent case in Littleton, CO). On the other side the Bible provides answers, and a hope that if we believe in Jesus will one day be redeemed to spend eternity with God.

V/R,

Wilfredo Hernández