Do you ever get tired of seeing stuff like this?
Rare skull sparks human evolution controversy
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN
updated 3:22 PM EDT, Thu October 17, 2013
I sure do!
It was reported earlier today that another one of our ancestor’s has been found. Okay, I’m going to show you the first three paragraphs of the article. They are short. You’ve got to see this…
Fragments of humans’ ancient relatives are scattered across the globe. Sometimes a tooth or a few bones are all we have to tell us about an entire species closely related to humans that lived thousands or millions of years ago. So when anyone finds a complete skull of a possible human ancestor, paleoanthropologists rejoice. But with new knowledge comes new controversy over a fossil’s place in our species’ very fuzzy family tree.
In the eastern European nation of Georgia, a group of researchers has excavated a 1.8 million-year-old skull of an ancient human relative, whose only name right now is Skull 5. They report their findings in the journal Science, and say it belongs to our genus, called Homo. “This is most complete early Homo skull ever found in the world,” said lead study author David Lordkipanidze, researcher at the Georgian National Museum in Tbilisi.
Skull 5 is the fifth example of a hominid — a bipedal primate mammal that walked upright — from this time period found at the site in Dmanisi, Georgia. Stone tools and animal bones have also been recovered from the area.
See the second sentence in the first paragraph? It says, “Sometimes a tooth or a few bones are all we have to tell us about an entire species closely related to humans that lived thousands or millions of years ago.” Okay, okay…I’ve got one for you, then how can they come up with this?
Now can I ask you something? How can some artist come up with this “man/ape” from that skull (shown above). Doesn’t he look real human? Just look at his eyes and lips and cheek bones. But, the ears are “ape” and the nose is “ape” and the eye ridge is “ape.” Do you think the artist who drew this picture has an agenda? Do you think there might be a bit of money in this whole deal to be made to find a “new species” and report it in a journal of Science so that a buck could be made?
Yes, Charles Darwin wrote the “Origin of the Species” in 1856 and his theory of evolution continues to be taught as fact in our schools. And let me tell you something… This is having a huge impact on what our young people believe about the Bible. You see, you can’t mix that picture above with Adam. Adam was 100% man, created in the image of God. Adam had perfect DNA. No mutations! So, do you expect me to believe that Adam was a knuckle-dragging hominid? No way José!
I read an article recently, “Should Christians Be Pushing to Have Creation Taught in Government Schools?” Full article here… Here’s a brief snippet (and note that I’ve italicized a few places for emphasis):
Public school teachers know that they can critically discuss different theories in regard to just about every issue—but not evolution. Even if a school board simply wants evolution to be critically analyzed (a good teaching technique, after all) without even mentioning creation or the Bible, the American Civil Liberties Union and other humanists are immediately up in arms. There are the usual accusations of trying to get “religion” into schools and that it’s a front for what they label as “fundamentalist Christianity.”
By the way, when the public school system threw out prayer, Bible readings, creation, and the Ten Commandments, they didn’t throw out religion. They replaced the Christian worldview influence with an atheistic one. The public schools, by and large, now teach that everything a student learns about science, history, etc., has nothing to do with God it can all be explained without any supernatural reference. This is a religious view—an anti-Christian view with which students are being indoctrinated. Humanists know that naturalistic evolution is foundational to their religion—their worldview that everything can be explained without God. That is why they are so emotional when it comes to the topic of creation/evolution.
Moms and Dads reading this, please understand that your children are not being taught like you were taught. There is an “all-out” assault on the Bible in the way that evolution is being taught today. When I was in school, evolution was almost laughed at by my high school Biology teacher. But, once I got to college, it was a VERY different story. If you are in college today and you say you believe in God and the Bible and the creation account of Genesis 1 and 2, you’ll be laughed off campus. Just think of it mom and dad…you’re paying good money to have college professors tell your kids what idiots you are for believing in the Bible and the Word of God. Sad isn’t it?
Let’s add another 10 years to everything and see what’s going to be coming down the pike and be taught in our schools. Let me tell you about what’s coming next. This was recently reported under the title:
By: Casey Luskin
WORLD Magazine August 23, 2013
Public education curricula in the United States have traditionally been controlled by local and state boards of education, but under newly crafted national guidelines called the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), K-12 public school students across the country may learn essentially the same uniform science curriculum, one that proselytizes for Darwinism.
The drive to nationalize science standards intensified in 2009 when a study found American students had fallen to 23rd in science internationally, ranking behind China, Japan, Germany, and Canada. In 2011 the National Research Council, an arm of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, released its Framework for K-12 Science Education, outlining specific science content and thinking skills that students should learn. The nonprofit corporation Achieve.org coordinated the team that drafted the final NGSS, published in April of this year.
Five states so far—Rhode Island, Kentucky, Maryland, Vermont, and Kansas—have adopted the standards, and states including California, Florida, Maine, Michigan, and Washington will soon be considering them. Proponents argue that nationalized standards will ensure a higher quality of instruction regardless of state or local policies. Critics respond that these national standards weren’t developed through a democratic, publicly transparent process. The NGSS drafting process excluded Darwin-skeptical groups and invited pro-Darwin advocacy groups like the National Center for Science Education.
That’s frightening to me! But, it gets worse. Look at what they are going to be teaching third graders and middle-school students if they get their way…
NGSS makes biological evolution a “core idea” and urges that by the third grade students should be presented with “evidence of common ancestry” of humans and animals. Middle-school students should “infer evolutionary relationships,” and in high school they should hear that “common ancestry and biological evolution are supported by multiple lines of empirical evidence.”
NGSS requires students to learn that similarities among vertebrate embryos indicate common ancestry, but says nothing about the significant differences between embryos in their earliest stages. A 2010 paper in the world’s foremost science journal, Nature, explained, “Counter to the expectations of early embryonic [similarities], many studies have shown that there is often remarkable divergence between related species both early and late in development.” Under the NGSS, such evidence would be excluded.
Now get this. Texas is going to fight it and so is Tennessee! Way to go Texas and our neighbors in Tennessee!
Polls suggest most parents will find the NGSS objectionable not because students will learn about biological evolution, but because they will hear only the evidence for Darwinism and none against it. According to a 2009 Zogby poll, 78 percent of likely American voters agree that “Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.”
Some states are resisting NGSS. Barbara Cargill, chair of the Texas State Board of Education, says Texas has a “zero percent chance” of adopting the new national standards. This is largely because in 2009 Texas completed an arduous process of updating its own science standards, which now require students to “analyze and evaluate” Darwinian concepts like common ancestry and natural selection.
In other states, teachers who cover required NGSS elements may still have freedom to discuss additional evidence. Tennessee, for example, is one of 26 “leading state partners” that helped draft NGSS, and has pledged to consider implementing them. But last year Tennessee adopted an academic freedom law, encouraging teachers to discuss both the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” of topics like climate change and biological evolution. (Full article here…)
You know what? There are still people in this country who say: “ENOUGH ALREADY!” Hallelujah! Want to know what a Yale Professor says about the future of education:
“Since the cultural revolution culminating in the 1970s, the left has run nearly all of the nation’s most influential, prestigious universities. Their alumni, in turn, run American culture—the broadcast networks, newspapers, the legal and many other professions, Hollywood, book publishing, and, most important, the massive, insensate, crush-everything-in-your-path mega-glacier known as the U.S. federal bureaucracy—and even more important than that, the education establishment charged with indoctrinating our children from kindergarten up.” David Gelernter, Professor of Computer Science, Yale University (Article here...)
I say, “Enough Already!” And this is why it matters to you, if you are a parent. Read carefully. Mr. Luskin says, and I think he’s right: “The future direction of the culture is set by the current culture of the elite colleges and universities.”
So, don’t be blinded mom and dad. One day your child will likely study in an institution that has teachers or professors who teach evolution. Why? Because the culture at large is slowly but surely being brain-washed by evolutionary thinking.
I know this is a lengthy post, but this is important. Parents, you need to print this out and read it to your kids if they are over the age of 10. Why? Because my post is so good? No, not necessarily. But, it provides information. And with information comes knowledge and knowledge brings power.
So, I want to end with the words of Ken Ham on the subject of Science versus the Bible and the article entitled “Don’t Science Disprove the Bible?”
1. Operational (or Observational) Science. This refers to knowledge gained by direct observation (using the five senses) and based on repeatable testing. Such “science” (knowledge) has enabled scientists to build our modern technology like airplanes and rocket ships. Whether one is a creationist or evolutionist, we all use the same operational science. Thus, both evolutionists and creationists can be honored for their observational science.
2. Historical Science. This refers to knowledge about the past—in essence, history. This type of science cannot be observed directly or based on repeated testing, so we need other ways of finding knowledge. The Genesis account of origins gives us knowledge about the past, revealed by an infallible witness—God. Those who believe in Darwinian evolution claim to have knowledge concerning the past, too, but it is based upon the beliefs of fallible humans who did not witness the supposed evolutionary history. Genesis is the true account of historical science, whereas evolution is really a fictional historical science.
Thus, the battle between creation and evolution (the Genesis account versus man’s account of origins) is really a battle over historical science. The role of operational (or observational science) is that it can be used to confirm or refute one’s historical science.
Observational science (in geology, biology, astronomy, anthropology, etc.) confirms the account of origins in Genesis and refutes the evolutionary account. (Many of these confirmations are available on our website, http://www.answersingenesis.org.)
The problem is not with the science but with the mistaken interpretation of unobserved history.
When listening to arguments that supposedly support evolution, you have to learn how to separate observational science and historical science. Here is one example to get you thinking in this way. If you see a claim that sedimentary rock strata containing fossils are millions of years old, then you need to sort out what is observational versus historical science. The statement that rocks are sedimentary rocks is one of observational science. Both creationists and evolutionists agree on what is directly observed.
But the claim that the rocks are millions of years old falls under historical science. It is not observed but rather an interpretation regarding the past. Biblical creationists would not agree with this interpretation but instead interpret the fossils as a deposit from the Flood of Noah’s day or some post-Flood catastrophe that occurred only thousands of years ago.
Thus, observational science cannot disprove the Bible. We agree on the observational science but totally disagree on the historical science. The problem is not with the operational science but with the mistaken interpretation of unobserved history.
Amen and amen!! Equip your children! Do it now before they come home one day proclaiming, “I believe in Evolution and the Bible is a myth!”
Read Full Post »