Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Knowing from Scripture that God didn’t create any ape-men, there are only three ways for the evolutionist to create one: 1) Combining Men and Apes, 2) Making Man out of Apes, and 3) Making Apes out of Man.
Homology refers to features that are similar among different animals, especially bones or DNA. For example, you may have heard that chimp and human DNA are 95–99% similar, or that our skeletons closely resemble chimp skeletons. Some people attempt to explain these similarities with evolutionary ideas.
Many may believe that there is a wide array of fossil evidence that clearly shows how apes have become humans. You have probably seen the famous depiction of a monkey progressively turning into an upright human figure. But what evidence is there for this popular picture?
In an effort to fill the gap between apes and men, certain fossil men have been declared to be “ape-like” and, thus, ancestral to, at least, “modern” man. The best known human fossils are of Cro-Magnon man and Neandertal man. Both are true men.
Evolutionists welcome the new australopithecine jaws to the “hominin” family. But do we learn anything at all about human history from these fossils?
The effort to fill in the gaps between apelike ancestors and modern humans continues to produce some interesting stories.
Does the chimpanzee ability to see-a-snake and sound-a-signal recapitulate the evolutionary underpinnings of human language?
Flexible feet supposedly link humans with ape-like ancestors.
Environmentally driven changes in diet are said to have driven evolution of humans.
Sugary sialic acid signatures seen as evolutionary segregators of early humans
Does the developing human brain portray the evolution of humans from ape-like creatures?
TIME magazine’s cover story this week asked the question, “What Makes us Different?”
It seems like evolution is always in the news. Whether it is a new dinosaur skeleton, a new fossil hominid or alleged genetic links between different species, evolution is frequently in the media.
Excitement over the latest (and allegedly greatest) find in the ‘tree of human evolution’ may end up with more embarrassment than anything else for evolutionists.
The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men.
Anyone who has ever watched the monkeys and apes at a zoo, couldn’t help but notice their resemblance to humans.
The bitterest pill to swallow for any Christian who attempts to “make peace” with Darwin is the presumed animal ancestry of man.
It is surely no coincidence that Time publishes such a ‘showcase’ article for human evolution at this time of public interest in the creation/evolution issue and what our children should be learning
This article gives information on ape-men once used as transitional forms, and information on those that are currently being contested.
This sort of thing just keeps on happening, but there are never headlines which shout ‘Missing Link Claim Debunked’.
An interesting change is taking place in creationist circles in respect of the status of the taxon Homo erectus and its relationship to Homo sapiens sapiens.
Most people believe the fossil record does support evolution because they are told this by others who confuse wishful thinking with facts.