Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Evolutionists More Insistent Than Ever About Being A Monkey's Uncle Transition

Evolutionists More Insistent Than Ever About Being A Monkey's Uncle Transition

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4 |Likes:
Published by Frederick Meekins
Evolutionists More Insistent Than Ever About Being A Monkey's Uncle
Evolutionists More Insistent Than Ever About Being A Monkey's Uncle

More info:

Published by: Frederick Meekins on Aug 13, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Evolutionists More Insistent Than Ever About Being A Monkey's Uncle
One wrench that use to be tossed into Darwinism's mechanistic view of the universe wasthe raising of the issue of what supposedly happened to all of those transitional forms.Even Darwin himself is alleged to have relented that his theory would ultimately be proven or discarded on the basis of such geological evidence.For well over a century now, those wanting to extol what passes for education over andabove commonsense have attempted to elaborate any number of conceptual bypassesaround the 800 pound subhuman hominid in the room.An article in the May 2011 edition of Discover Magazine makes such an attempt by positioning that we ourselves are the transitional forms or at least what's left over of them in terms of primate evolution. No longer are we to think of ourselves in terms of being exclusively modern homosapiens. Rather we are to view ourselves as the genetic composites of previousancestors such as Neanderthals and those other creatures reminiscent of Chaka fromLand of the Lost.This theory is put forward as an attempt to silence the critics of naturalistic evolution.Yet the hypothesis ends up raising a number of questions that reveal just what one has toignore and overlook in order to accept this particular narrative's attempt to account for the origins of man.Foremost, if other higher order hominids were eventually wiped out or disappeared because they interbred increasingly with what we would recognize as human beings,why wouldn't these alleged ancestors we are more reluctant to embrace as part of our own kind, if they are able to produce a fecund offspring as a result of copulation throughmating, be considered fellow human beings?For is not the history of Anthropology literally littered with the corpses of peoplethought to be of the status of less than fully human? I recall Ken Ham one time claimingthat at one point in the 1800's Australian Aborigines were harvested as researchspecimens.Even when these remains are uncovered as part of legitimate research and excavation, itmust be asked if a number of these conclusions arrived at are really inherent to theevidence or are active imaginations reading back into the data what these researchersinstead intensely want to see.For if Neanderthals could interbreed with run of the mill human beings to the point
where certain evolutionary theorists are insisting that we ourselves are partially Neanderthal, aren't Neanderthals just another racial or ethnic group?Researcher Jack Cuozzo hypothesized in “Buried Alive:The Startling Truth About Neanderthal Man” that Neanderthals may have been the extremely aged or the diseasedsuffering from degenerative bone conditions similar to arthritis. For daring to proffer such a conjecture foremost proponents of inquiry and knowledge resorted tointimidation and threats of violence for presenting such an unconventional perspective.By downplaying distinctions between human beings and what were at one timecategorized as species preceding us along the chain of primatology obviously nothingmore than glorified apes, radical evolutionists hope to further erode the preconceived boundaries between the species for the purposes of biological manipulativeamalgamationSeveral years ago, I posted a column about Darwinistic propaganda speculating that in prehistoric times that the genetic boundaries might not have been as set in stone with jungle fever taking on a connotation that might shock those of us entrapped by amorality that frowns upon transpecies romance.Sophisticates of the scientific establishment easily dismiss bloggers for being out of touch and not playing with a full deck. However, seldom will they speak out againstmedia mouthpieces allied in the cause of foisting a revolutionary secularism upon thenation such as The New Republic.On the cover of the April 23, 2008 issue was a photo that bordered on the creepy.Depicted was a chimpanzee gazing dreamily off into the sky. However, that was not thetruly disturbing aspect.For as the chimp looked to the sky, tucked beneath his arm was a human female.However, this was not the embrace of a zookeeper showing a little affection to one of her charges or like one would share with a pet. Rather, from the depiction, one getsmore of the impression that these two are somehow lovers.The look on the woman's face with head tilted back with her eyes shut and her handintertwined with the paw of the chimp causes one to wonder if the duo might goswinging in the trees together a bit later if one gets the drift.Some might dismiss such shock as the rantings of a prude with too much time on their hands. However, numerous credentialed scientists have come out speculating as to the possibility of a human/chimp hybrid as mankind's technical expertise continues toadvance while moral expertise among the overly educated continues to atrophy.According to an article in Wired Magazine titled “Science Without Limits”, such a

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->