Become a columnist. Or write an article. Or head back to the homepage.

Columns

Darwin And The Bones Of Contention

Before the O.J. Simpson trial, legal scholars here in the U.S. called the 1922 Scopes Trial the Trial of the Century. Media frenzy surrounded a small town in Tennessee when a schoolteacher named Mr. Scopes contested the Darwinian theory of evolution and taught Creationism. It was ultimately decided that it was only proper to teach evolution because in a court of law, faith takes a back seat to hard evidence and proof. If that is so, then what do we make of Neanderthal Man?

Back in the 1800s, a French farmer in the Neanderthal Valley unearthed some rather curious human bones that were eventually taken to a renowned German biologist who declared that the human had a massive bone structure, an elongated head that narrowed at the base of the neck, was stooped and had large teeth. His conclusion was that it was the bones of a boy, about age 15, who likely suffered from rickets owing to the stooped position, a disease caused by a vitamin D deficiency, which is primarily caused by lack of direct sunlight.

The analysis was immediately dismissed and for the next 150 years, we have been taught that Neanderthals were an evolutionary link. The stooped position was said to be because man hadn't learned to walk upright, yet, and the big toe on each foot was splayed to more resemble an ape's foot. Modern researchers now agree that such a standing position probably would result in falling on their face, unable to walk.

So the question arose of just who - or what - is Neanderthal? Anthropologists point to the fact that Neanderthals reigned throughout Europe for between 300,000 to 500,000 years and quickly vanished without a very good reason when modern Homo Sapiens arrived. Were they less intelligent? Did they intermarry? Did they die of new diseases?

No actual weapons are associated with Neanderthal remains, though new evidence suggests they built villages and had a proficient use of fire, tools for skinning and making clothing. This is evidence of abstract thinking and modern intelligence. Newer skeletal samples suggest Neanderthal was not a five foot 15 year oldsâ height, but at maturity stood nearly 6'. The skull is indicative of an enlarged section of the brain dealing with coordination giving a larger brain than ourselves, and the face was generally concave, though if Neanderthal dressed in modern clothing, we would not be able to distinguish him from modern man.

This then suggests that Neanderthals were extremely athletic and powerful because of their bone structure and agility. They didn't need weapons -- they ran down their prey and killed it with their bare hands, their teeth positioned to bite. If anything, Homo Sapiens was relieved that Neanderthal vanished.

But if all this is so, then how can Creationism be true? I mean, if we qualify Neanderthal as human, then what of Adam and Eve, because Neanderthal comes into the picture about 500,000 years before the time of Creation as calculated by theologians.

To further stir up the pot, evolutionists say that human "links" like Australopithecus, living perhaps a million years ago had barely more than half the normal sized brain of modern man. Then I watched the evening news one night where a little nine-year-old girl had a vicious brain disease and doctors removed an entire side portion of her brain. When she recovered, the girl went back to school and made excellent grades. If that is so, then what is to be surmised with the brain size of Australopithecus? What does it do to Creationism? What does it say about evolution?

Being ever curious about the interpretation of the Bible, I sought out the most knowledgeable person I knew to discuss these facts and questions, and we concluded we don't know all the answers. In a court of law such as the Scopes Trial, we are told that irrefutable evidence must hold sway to unproven faith, but in the case of these bones of contention, there is no irrefutable evidence either way we go. We do know that Neanderthal was just as smart, but different. It means he wasn't stupid, but different species of men.

It says that evolution is bunk, because if evolution were solid fact, we would witness the changes ourselves, yet no one has ever seen any living thing evolve into something else, much less seen or witnessed Neanderthal turn into Homo-Sapiens. Based on this information, then faith must be the sole, irrefutable evidence. Despite the gaping questions posed by what Genesis offers in the Bible in reference to "early man", we must conclude that in the absence of proof for evolution, we must believe our own religious convictions.

by

Fred Roe
4th June 2003

Topics