The Evolution Deceit
In 1891, Eugene Dubois, who had dedicated himself to searching for the theory of evolution’s so-called missing link, discovered a skull fragment on the shores of the River Solo on the island of Java in Indonesia. Dubois believed that this skull possessed both human and simian (ape-like) properties. A year later, he discovered a thigh bone some 15 meters from where he had found the top of the cranium and concluded that this thigh bone—which was very similar to those of human beings—and the skull might have belonged to the same body.
Based on these two pieces of bone, he adopted the idea that this fossil might be a transitional form and gave it an impressive scientific name: Pithecanthropus erectus, or “upright-walking apeman.” Popularly referred to as Java Man, the fossil had a skull volume of around 900 cubic centimeters and was suggested to be around 500,000 years old.
Dubois thought that the Trinil stratum in which the fossil was found was underneath the border between the Pleistocene and Pliocene (Tertiary) periods; and was certain that human beings had evolved during the Middle Pleistocene. For that reason, according to Dubois, the age of Java Man was entirely compatible with its being the missing link. However, Dubois had prepared a study of the Javanese fossil fauna before he discovered that fossil—which study totally contradicted the information was to provide about Java Man. But following his discovery of Java Man, his comments regarding the fauna study made an abrupt about-face.
Marvin L. Lubenow spent some 20 years researching Java Man. In his book Bones of Contention, he states that Dubois did not possess sufficient geological knowledge when he discovered the fossil:
When Dubois issued his first description of the fossil Javanese fauna he designated it Pleistocene. But no sooner had he discovered his Pithecanthropus than the fauna had suddenly to become Tertiary. He did everything in his power to diminish the Pleistocene character of the fauna. 230
Dubois said that the thigh bone and the skull belonged to the same creature. Yet eminent scientists of the time came to the opposite conclusion. The famous Cambridge University anatomist Sir Arthur Keith clearly stated that a skull with such a volume could not belong to an ape and revealed the absence of structural features permitting powerful mastication and particular to apes. Keith said that the skull was very definitely human.
Dubois’ claims on the basis of these two bones approached the fantastic. A directed perspective underlay his claims. Since Dubois was an evolutionist, he acted in the light of certain preconceptions and was unwilling to consider any alternative possibility. He also harbored obvious hostility towards those who criticized his opinions.
Another discovery that totally refuted Dubois’ ape-man nonsense came from Dr. Walkhoff, an anthropologist, who found the upper part of a human molar tooth in a dried-up region of the River Solo, no more than three kilometers (two miles) from where Dubois had discovered Java Man. This fossilized molar was human and dated back to a period as old as that to which Java Man supposedly belonged. A team of experts who were all evolutionists carried out this project, with the aim of finding fossils to verify evolution. Nonetheless, the head of the team, Professor Selenka, concluded that modern man and Java Man had lived at the same time, and that there could therefore be no evolutionary relationship between Java Man and modern human beings.
In the final chapter of the report, Dr. Max Blanckenhorn, who acted as project secretary, apologized to readers for having demolished Dubois’ thesis with their discovery instead of confirming it!
All this goes to show that there is no difference between Java Man, depicted as an ape-man, and modern humans. The only thing that can be suggested with regard to Java Man is the small size of the skull volume, although there are races with small skulls living today. In addition, among these races are native Australians, who live not so very far from the island of Java. Thus the fact that Java Man is a genuine human becomes even clearer.
Phillip Johnson, has been a professor of law at Berkeley University for 26 years, and is one of the world’s most important critics of Darwinism. In Darwin on Trial, Johnson states that the philosophy behind the theory of evolution was based on naturalism, and that evolution is supported for ideological reasons:
. . . the leaders of science see themselves as locked in a desperate battle against religious fundamentalists, a label which they tend to apply broadly to anyone who believes in a Creator who plays an active role in worldly affairs. These fundamentalists are seen as a threat to liberal freedom, and especially as a threat to public support for scientific research. As the creation myth of scientific naturalism, Darwinism plays an indispensable ideological role in the war against fundamentalism. For that reason, the scientific organizations are devoted to protecting Darwinism rather than testing it, and the rules of scientific investigation have been shaped to help them succeed.231
In his following words, Johnson clarifies why the origin of mind cannot be explained with theory of evolution:
A theory that is the product of a mind can never adequately explain the mind that produced the theory. The story of the great scientific mind that discovers absolute truth is satisfying only so long as we accept the mind itself as a given. Once we try to explain the mind as a product of its own discoveries, we are in a hall of mirrors with no exit.232
Until several years ago, this term was given to collections of DNA whose functions were unknown to scientists. For the time being, they referred to these long sequences that they were unable to describe as genes as “junk DNA.” They also suggested that these long sections of DNA, which served no purpose according to their understanding at the time, were evidence of evolution.
According to this thesis, junk DNA was composed of segments that had accumulated during the evolutionary process, but which now had no use.
This claim, based on no scientific grounds, consisted solely of unfounded speculation. The reason why it was so easily able to find a place in the literature was that in those days, very little was known about DNA. The functions of those parts of DNA known as “junk” had not yet been brought discovered.
However, with the Human Genome Project and other similar genetic research, it emerged that genes were constantly interacting with one another during the protein-production process. (See Genome Project, the.) During the course of this production, It was realized that no one gene works independently of other DNA segments. The point we are at today shows that while one gene works, especially during the initial protein codification phase, parts of the DNA that do not constitute genes help regulate it. For that reason, any scientist interested in genetics or who closely monitors developments no longer attaches any worth to the concept of junk DNA.
The fact that these DNA segments are in a constant state of activity has actually been known for a considerable time, whether evolutionists like it or not. Molecular biologists from the Harvard University Medical Faculty and physicists from Boston University shed light on this matter in a report titled “Does nonsense DNA speak its own dialect?” published in Science magazine in 1994.233 As a result of their research into 37 DNA strands containing 50,000 base pairs, taken from various living things, they reported that the “empty” DNAthat makes up 90% of human DNA is actually written in a special language.
Evan Eichler, an evolutionist scientist from Cleveland University, made the following admission:
The term “junk DNA” is a reflection of our ignorance.234
In fact, this concept is simply the latest example of the “vestigial organs” that evolutionists have been proposing since the beginning of the 20th century. (See Vestigial Organs thesis, the.) At that time, many evolutionists suggested that many organs whose functions had not yet been discovered (for example, the appendix and the coccyx) were useless, vestigial organs and left behind in the course of evolution. Later medical research, however, revealed that these organs imagined to be useless actually performed important functions. The appendix, for instance, was shown to be part of the body’s immune system, and the coccyx to be an attachment point for important muscles.
In the words of the evolutionist author Steven R. Scadding, “As our knowledge has increased, the list of vestigial structures has decreased,” 235 and eventually disappeared altogether.
Today the same thing applies to those parts of the chromosome that some would like to consider vestigial DNA. Yet as our biological knowledge increases, so this claim is increasingly unfounded.
They said, “Glory be to You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us. You are the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” (Surat al-Baqara, 32)
232.Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial, p. 155. Phillip E. Johnson, Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law & Education, Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1995, p. 62.