For the nth Time, Man did not evolve from Apes
September 4, 2007 47 Comments
And I could add, from a common ancestor but that is a subject for another post.
However, Pastore’s latest offering, “The Latest Problems with the ‘Man Evolved from Apes’ Thesis”, has some points of concern , mainly the title (though I agree, for the most part, with his conclusions).
As a general rule, us creationists are painted as ignorant rubes who are blinded by dogma and what is believed to be a blind faith.
Admittedly, sometimes Christians offer plenty of reasons for those dogmatically entrenched in naturalistic worldviews to make such statements. Though, I would argue that the average “evolutionist” is not as learned in his articles of faith as he expects his creationist opponents to be.
Back to Pastore’s column, the title is troublesome because “evolutionists” do not believe that “man evolved from apes”. If I had a nickel for every time a well-intentioned Christian made this misinformed statement, I could probably build another one of these.
“Evolutionists” believe that apes and humans share a common ancestor, an altogether different proposition than “man evolved from apes”.
Though this is not the assertion of any strand of evolutionary theory, paleontologist G.G. Simpson did make the following point in his classic piece “The World into Which Darwin Led Us”,
In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man’s ancestors were apes or monkey (or successively both). It is pusillanimous if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise. Science 131:966-969
Unfortunately, Pastore repeats his mistake within the column. He also makes the following statement,
I’m talking about the two discoveries that came out in August that should force all those “man evolved from apes” evolution charts in schoolbooks to be redrawn. You know the ones. You’ve got the knuckle-dragging, club-wielding ape on the left hand side and a businessman carrying a briefcase on the right hand side, with all the hypothetical evolutionary links filled in between (as in this one).
What needs to be pointed out is that the scientific establishment has considered this famous diagram to be “fiction”. Well if one considers the journal Nature to speak for the scientific establishment.
For example, in the journal, Nature (403 [27 January 2000]:363), J.J. Hublin wrote:
The once-popular fresco showing a single file of marching hominids becoming ever more vertical, tall, and hairless now appears to be a fiction.
Draw your own conclusions as to why the general public has not heard about this “retraction”.