merely politician destroy IMF

YouTube

YouTube

560346 iscritti
68405217 visualizzazioni video
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3

      Fun For Kids

      PLANETS!
         
      Here it comes!” Laura shouted.
      We stood outside with our heads cranked back as far as possible, our faces bathed in the light of a million stars.

      Suddenly, a brilliant glow appeared and streaked slowly across the night sky. It was a space shuttle! It was in the Earth’s atmosphere high in the air above us and would sink slowly across the skies of the United States until it finally landed at its station.
      It would soon land and tell of its amazing adventures within the depths of space.

      Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. In the heavens above us float eight beautiful and enchanting planets spinning in their silent orbits.

      Beyond these, a billion other stars shine between the fiery trails of shooting chunks of rocky comets and asteroids.

      It’s a world of mystery where huge celestial bodies rule the territory and, at night when our sun shifts its shining to the other side of Earth, they watch down on us like tiny pinpricks, as if God plugged in some nightlights so we could see at night.
      But where did they come from? How did they get into the orbits they are in?
      Evolutionists would say that once upon a time there was a ball of many gasses. It condensed and packed closer and closer together until so much heat and pressure built up that…it exploded!

      They call this “the Big Bang.” It shot particles of dust and gasses for miles and as the years passed those particles began to gravitate toward each other, rotating and slowly packing into planets and stars.
      Now stop! Think about this for a minute. Could this really happen? Let’s look at some scientific facts about our universe and see if there might be a more believable theory.
      Let’s begin at the beginning…
      And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth”…He also made the stars. Genesis 1:14-16

      So on the 4th day of creation God made each planet and star using His unique imagination and practicality. He created them as a natural calendar and to spark our imagination.


         
      By observing our neighboring planets, we can conclude that God’s hand, not the Big Bang, was what spread out the stars and planets in our universe and that the universe is young, not millions of years old.
      *The Big Bang Did Not Spread Out the Planets and Stars:
      If you held a bunch of sand in your hand and then sneezed into it, the sand would shoot out in all directions. Now the sand particles closest together would be flying in the same direction. If a “Big Bang” had shot out all the particles that somehow “became” the planets in our Solar System, wouldn’t they all be spinning the same direction? Uranus, Venus, Pluto, and at least six of the Solar System’s 63 moons spin backward, or in the opposite direction as the other planets!
      *The Universe is Young:
      Creationists say that when you study the men of the Bible, the entire universe should only be 6,000 years old. Evolutionists, however, say that the universe was created billions of years ago by the Big Bang and that it took thousands of years for the planets and stars that we have today to form together.

      If this was true, the inside cores of planets should be cooled off by reduction of kinetic or movement energy, planets’ rings should be ground away to dust, moons should have thick layers of solar dust on them, and Earth should be spread so far from the sun that all life would freeze and so far from its moon that the ocean tides would be different.

        
      Scientists study each of these issues:
        
      · They have found that Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and our moon have hot ‘insides!’

         
      · Saturn’s rings are just belts of asteroids which have been caught in Saturn’s gravity and rotate around it. Many are hit and destroyed by meteors each day; the amount of rings Saturn has would be crushed and pulverized in just a couple thousand years. If the universe is a billion years old, Saturn should not have rings left.
      · Just as dust settles on furniture in your house, ‘space dust’ collects in layers on moons and planets. When astronauts went to our moon, they expected to jump off the aircraft and sink into deep layers of dust.

          
      But instead, when they hopped off the ship, there was only a couple inches of dust collected. If the moon were floating in space for millions of years, it would have had more dust. According to the amount of dust collected, the moon is only some thousand years old!
      · The moon is moving away from the Earth a couple centimeters every year, yet it is around the perfect distance to create good ocean tides on Earth. If the universe was millions of years old, the moon would have been so close to the Earth it would have smashed into it! If the universe was only 6,000 years old, the moon would still be able to do its job at the right distance.

      So, if we study the facts of the universe, we see that it runs the way it does because it was created by God in its unique way. God made some planets rotate backward, and gave the moon its job of regulating Earth’s ocean tide. And he created it all just 6,000 years ago!
      For posters on creation, visit http://www.drdino.com/ . Once at this site, go to the search page and type in "Evidence for Creation and a Young Earth."
      Written by Mandi Roberts


      General Museum Hours
      Thursday - Saturday
      10:00am - 4:00pm

      Thanksgiving Holiday Hours
      Friday - Saturday
      10:00am - 4:00pm

      Creation Evidence in the 21st Century Webcast

       


      Passing of P. Burton Stokes
                                                                            
      One of the Creation Evidence Museum’s finest Consultants and Team Members, P. Burton Stokes, has passed to his Eternal Home in the presence of our Lord. Burton assisted as Photo and Video Documentarian in the public excavations at Glen Rose and in the dinosaur excavations in Colorado for many years while he was in good health. He promoted the museum untiringly both publicly and privately.
      Upon graduating from Tulane University with a degree in physics, the United States Air Force actually “sequestered” him in classified security development, due to his gifted intelligence in this field. He worked thirty years with the Air Force Security Service – developing electronic surveillance for the United States during the Cold War. Many of the patents he holds from these years are still classified today.
      Upon retirement he became an ordained minister and pastored effectively for twenty-two years. His faith in the Bible as the inspired Word of God was firm and unshakable.
      Burton held to a literal six-day recent creation as described in the Bible. As a scientist and physicist he was a staunch supporter of the Creation Model, and specifically the Canopy Theory as held by the Creation Evidence Museum.
      He is survived by his dear wife, Betty, three daughters, six grandchildren, and eleven great-grandchildren. He was greatly loved and appreciated, and will be missed by all of us.

      Noah's Ark Replica

      Noah's Ark Replica Left Side

      The Ark replica represents the tangible display of the "gopher technique" used to build the original Noah's Ark. Today this technique would be called structural interlamination, consisting of all components being laminated together with a strong hydrocarbon resin. Gopher, as mentioned in Scripture, was not a species of wood, but was an engineering technique with the use of wood.

      Noah's Ark Replica Right Side


          The Creation Evidence Museum of Texas is a 501(c)3 non-profit educational museum chartered in Texas in 1984 for the purpose of researching and displaying scientific evidence for creation. As such the museum sponsors paleontological and archaeological excavations in addition to other extensive research projects.  Carl Baugh, the museum’s Founder and Director,
      originally came to Glen Rose, Texas to critically examine claims of human and dinosaur co-habitation. He conducted extensive excavations along the Paluxy River, with appropriate permission of the landowners. These original excavations yielded human footprints among dinosaur footprints (see the Director’s doctoral dissertation).He then realized that a museum needed to be established in order to appropriately display this evidence, along with sustained excavations and other areas of scientific research for creation.
      To request a catalog containing our books and DVD's:
      Creation Evidence Museum of Texas
      P.O. Box 309   Glen Rose, Texas 76043-0309
      (254)897-3200 FAX (254)897-3100

      A  video tape tour is given during regular hours. This includes an explanation of the creation significance of the various artifacts and fossils on display, and concludes with a brief explanation of the creation model.  Personal lectures are available Tuesdays and Wednesdays for groups of 25 or more by appointment only.
      Hours of Operation
      Thursday thru Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
      Admission Fee - $5.00 per person
      Children 5 and under – free

      @synnek1 CIA 666 spammers to paid ---> many times with your accomplices spammers CIA: you have said that: I am a pedophile? and it is not true! but, that Satanists are cannibals: and make human sacrifices on the altar of Satan? everyone knows that! you defend satanists on this page! then you must also receive their shame
    • LaVeraDottrina
      LaVeraDottrina ha pubblicato un commento
      4 minuti fa
      Extra Ecclesiam nulla Salus
    • LaVeraDottrina
      LaVeraDottrina ha pubblicato un commento
      4 minuti fa
      Most Holy Family Monastery
    • blekmaster12
      blekmaster12 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      Hey You Tube when the copyright strike 1 will be reomved?
    • LANDSERgegenPANZER
      LANDSERgegenPANZER ha pubblicato un commento
      6 minuti fa
      holocaust
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      8 minuti fa
      @ NAZI PANZER LANDSERgegen IMF CIA SAID: "@ uniUsR3ei I sent your message: further Top: to other people: Is that ok for you? - ANSWER ----> MESSAGE [666 CIA IMF yes! Racist Nazi criminal Satanist: Priest of satan: cannibal] - The Life of Israel? is more important than mine! That Is, you go to cry, the Rothschild's your mom? does not matter to me: all the sites close to me That you can through false pretenses: as you've done with my fourth site That you have deleted: "CIAkillYourTubexIMF"
    • @satanist synne kkk ---> that is, you go to cry, the Rothschild your mom?
    • @NAZI CIA IMF LANDSERgegen PANZER -- the life of Israel? is more important than mine!
    • @ Hopefulfilment --- apologize for my attack to you(but you've been flippant with your background image), but I am frightened for occult powers: the [IMF: ie 666]; [NWO: ie 322], masonic powers, institutional satanism, etc. .. that: they are to destroy Israel and the world: of which: also, the false theory of evolution: that is their agenda! but, now, is very close: the our death for the 3 ° WW nuclear
    • [CHEMICAL CONTROL]
    • LANDSERgegenPANZER
      LANDSERgegenPANZER ha pubblicato un commento
      27 minuti fa
      @uniUsR3ei I sent your message further to other people is that ok for you ?
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      31 minuti fa
      CIA 666 IMF yes! racist nazi criminal satanist: priest of satan: cannibal
    • LANDSERgegenPANZER
      LANDSERgegenPANZER ha pubblicato un commento
      35 minuti fa
      thats my old channel
    • LANDSERgegenPANZER
      LANDSERgegenPANZER ha pubblicato un commento
      35 minuti fa
      i am synnek1
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      36 minuti fa
      LANDSER gegenPANZER spammers --criminal v satan synnek1 666 CIA nazi IMF v
    • LANDSERgegenPANZER
      LANDSERgegenPANZER ha pubblicato un commento
      39 minuti fa
      -
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      40 minuti fa
      Hopefulfilment -- You do not pretend: of be silly for not to adare at war! you answer my scientific questions or go to lose yourself in a sewer!
    • Synnek1
      Synnek1 ha pubblicato un commento
      41 minuti fa
      [SUCKERS]
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      46 minuti fa
      I am not a prophet or God! I am merely a politician to destroy the IMF, etc. ..



    YouTube

    YouTube

    560235 iscritti
    68404104 visualizzazioni video
    @Satanists Freemasons 666 322 Sharia Talmud , Rothschild ---> Blessed are those who grasp: your children: and whisk them: against the stone. Psalm 137.9  
    Hopefulfilment .---> 1. What are fossil polistrate? 2. What is the genome? 1. cosa sono i polistrate fossil? 2. cosa è il genoma? 
    Hopefulfilment -- Atheist of shit! God has made ​​you a divine creature! But, you have made yourself the monkey of Satan! and then, Einsteain: he was a creationist, together to Galileo, Newton, etc. ..  
    @Hopefulfilment - Atheist international criminal(Mason, a slave of the International Monetary Fund: animal from the human form: in the words of the Talmud)! the formula for determining, the geological eras?: consists of 7 data! of which only two of them: they are known, then, by convention (dogma) the other 5 data, which are not known? were considered equal to "zero" here's why: come out of very large numbers (milion years)! but the tale of Snow White has more dignity, that, the theory of evolution. why, who has done: the structure evolution of living beings? he put a finger in the ass: and the other on a crystal ball!
    Re: codard came in youtube page:  Hopefulfilment said: Thank you for your kind letter. I understand that there is something troubling you. Is there some grave danger that I have missed? Can you please tell me what you think I should do and the evidence for your position? Best regards! Hopefulfilment --ANSWER-> THE JEWS OF THE IMF from French Revolution to today? have perverted everything! science, too: to make of you: an animal to be exploited (as the Talmud them said) and they did it:! 1. because you can not respond scientifically to my questions! 2. because the crime of losing: monetary sovereignty: it is a crime: for the death penalty!

    1. Israel's history is a scientific fact!
    2. the apostolic community of the apostles martyrs is a scientific fact. 3. The Talmud even, if has swearing cursing: has found Jesus as a real character! You are free to invent any stories you want, but if it's a fairy tale, that, will do harm to others, or, is to go around: to say blasphemy? you will be destroyed (in your most precious interests: faith, hope and love, health, welfare), but even before I die!
    because God does not suffer unnecessarily its martyrs

    @NAZI CIA IMF LANDSERgegen PANZER SAID: " @uniUsR3ei I sent your message: further: to other people: is that ok for you ? --ANSWER-->MESSAGE[ CIA 666 IMF yes! racist nazi criminal satanist: priest of satan: cannibal ] -- the life of Israel? is more important than mine! that is, you go to cry, the Rothschild your mom? does not matter to me: all the sites that you can close to me through false pretenses: as you've done with my fourth site that you have deleted: "CIAkillYourTubexIMF" @ Hopefulfilment --- apologize for my attack to you(but you've been flippant with your background image), but I am frightened for occult powers: the [IMF: ie 666]; [NWO: ie 322], masonic powers, institutional satanism, etc. .. that: they are to destroy Israel and the world: of which: also, the false theory of evolution: that is their agenda! but, now, is very close: the our death for the 3 ° WW nuclear.


    [satanism and perversion of the Word of God: in the Talmud, and Koran Sharia: against YHWH] @ israelnationalTV - The Arabs [You have become the best people [Arabs][Jews talmud] that has ever been presented to humanity: the Koran - Sura III, 109 ] could no longer embrace other religions outrageous, so that together with the Talmud, Christians that are polytheists, have become: "idolaters", so they can not escape the death sentence! This is the logic of the Talmud (which has polluted parts of the ancient Old Testament) and the Qur'an also! Because, the only true: Word of God, that he JHWH has personally wrote: ie, are: the Ten Commandments, everything else, can be more or less a word divine! Talmud and Koran have filled, of hatred, of a fake: yahweh, against foreign peoples.

    [satanism and perversion of the Word of God: in the Talmud, and Koran Sharia: against YHWH] @ israelnationalTV -  Just remember all the woes with which God has punished all the "Peoples enemies". is speculate, at the hatred and racism, that is, in any fundamentalists terrorists, entertain for foreigners, including the prohibition of marrying foreign women ... The Arabs could not embrace the religion which outraged. And Mahomet fell on fertile ground to spread the Koran through extermination. That, in contrast to the Old Testament(and therir talmud), proclaims, the Arabs as a people beloved by Allah and Arabic as sacred. There were all the conditions, for to merge, a religious Satanism, with the national identity. 
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      1 secondo fa
      MarlaMarleen Re:alleluia it works:-) But I can't post this text on the YouTubechannel. Inviato a: UniusRei3
    • MarlaMarleen SAID: Good morning UniusRei3. I can't comment on certain videos. But not always Yesterday, YouTube hasn't approved 7-8 comments of mine. It was no spam, but originals :-) I use the translator rare. translator often disfigures the sense. I don't know what I'll think of all. The thing with the real names disturbs. Not personally by myself. But it's a incredible interference with private life. YouTube is a stooges of Google. But who's in fact behind Google? Now I must to work.--- ANSWER--> send me your message and audience it for you!
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      VIETNAM Christians are seen as criminals from any communists and muslims country [all discrediting is for Hanoi government and the Communist Party criminal too]. VIETNAM, Catholic dissident's mother sets herself on fire. Anger and bewilderment of Vietnamese by J.B. An Dang. Dang Thi Kim Lieng's self-immolation in front of government offices in the southern province of Bac Lieu. Her daughter Maria Ta Phong Tan, a former policewoman converted to Christianity, is in jail awaiting trial. She faces up to 20 years in prison for propaganda against the state. Human rights activists and bloggers: specious accusations. Hanoi (AsiaNews) - The Vietnamese Catholic community is in shock over the death of Dang Thi Kim Lieng, mother of Mary Ta Phong Tan (pictured), a famous dissident in jail awaiting trial who faces up to 20 years in prison. The woman set herself on fire in front of government offices in the southern province of Bac Lieu,
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      VIETNAM Christians are seen as criminals from any communists and muslims country [all discrediting is for Hanoi government and the Communist Party criminal too]. to protest against abuses by the prison authorities who hold her daughter, depriving her of basic rights. The mother died from severe wounds inflicted by the flames sparking the reaction of many bloggers in the country, who accuse the Communist Party and government leaders of a policy of repression and of systematically violating the freedom of religion and thought, with trumped-up charges including "spreading propaganda against the state." Without saying a word to family and friends, Dang Thi Kim Lieng went to the government offices in the province of Bac Lieu and self-immolated. Activists and lawyers who fight for human rights in Vietnam say that the woman died during her transport to the hospital in Ho Chi Minh City.
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      VIETNAM Christians are seen as criminals from any communists and muslims country [all discrediting is for Hanoi government and the Communist Party criminal too]. However, neither police nor the official authorities have commented on the case or confirmed the event. Some relatives report that Dang recently appeared very concerned about the fate of her daughter Maria Ta Phong Tan, locked in a prison in the former Saigon, whom she has not seen since last September, the date of her arrest. The police maintain she is guilty of "subversive activities" and of having written "slander" published online, discrediting the Hanoi government and the Communist Party. The hearing in court against Mary Tan, 44, should begin on 7 August and there is a very real possibility she will be sentenced to decades in prison. She is a former police officer well known in Vietnam, because she denounced abuses and distortions of the prison system online
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      VIETNAM Christians are seen as criminals from any communists and muslims country [all discrediting is for Hanoi government and the Communist Party criminal too]. (see AsiaNews 17/04/2012 Vietnamese government tries three bloggers for writing about strikes and justice). Her decision to convert to Catholicism also weighs against her, after an adolescence and childhood characterized by continuous "brainwashing" in Communist ideology. However, her encounter with a lawyer and activist for human rights sparked her desire to rediscover the faith that, over time, led her to baptism.
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      5 minuti fa
      VIETNAM Christians are seen as criminals from any communists and muslims country [all discrediting is for Hanoi government and the Communist Party criminal too]. The Vietnamese government has implemented tight control over religious activities, and Catholics are often victims of violence and abuse, both individuals and entire communities. Among the many examples are the Montagnards in the Central Highlands and the Redemptorist Fathers, in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, whose pastoral commitment is choked with systematic regularity. However, this violence did not prevent them from playing a key role in the spread of Catholicism and the teachings of the Church, especially among the poor and the abandoned (see AsiaNews 05/08/2011 Redemptorists teach Church's social doctrine in Ho Chi Minh City).
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      13 minuti fa
      07/31/2012 SRI LANKA. Sri Lanka: Buddhists ban on vasectomy and tubectomy. An organization of Buddhist monks believed that the population is "at risk" because of family planning programs promoted by the government. No mention of minorities in the country. Buddhists account for 70% of the state population.07/31/2012 INDIA Asian Nobel goes to Indian activist who fights for women and girls by Nirmala Carvalho Kulandei Francis, founder and president of Integrated Village Development Project (Ivdp), wins the 2012 Magsaysay Award in the "community leadership" category . His fight against poverty and discrimination puts women at the center, helping to create micro-businesses to make them independent in their economic and social development. Fundamental commitment to stop feticide and female infanticide.
    • UniusRei3
      UniusRei3 ha pubblicato un commento
      14 minuti fa
      07/31/2012 CHINABeijing plays up the carrot while still wielding the stick. What happened in Shifang and Wukan could lead people to think that Communist authorities have changed the ways they address the growing number of social protests in China. But they would be wrong. Although the party wants to show that it is close to the people, it is also trying to keep young people away from politics and stop the action of dissidents and human rights activists. Beijing must be careful though. Young people have been the real driving force of every revolution and young Chinese are increasingly working for change. Here's an analysis by Willy Lam, an expert in the matter, which AsiaNews is publishing with permission from the Jamestown Foundation.
    • NoahTheNephilim
      NoahTheNephilim ha pubblicato un commento
      20 minuti fa
      [God did not leave without me, lethal weapons]   NightDarothic posted a comment 41 hours ago said: HA HA HA, tisk tisk lol what a shame too
      @criminal cannibal, 666 CIA IMF - THAT, MAY HAVE VALUE: the opinion of A Satanist: that is called: "gegenPanzer of Landser shit, "my comment? annoy the criminals of the IMF, like you!, I have to feel ashamed of myself for being Attacked: by Satanists: so dishonest? but this is an honor for me! not only, this is proof That Also your animal (monster of the IMF: International Monetary Fund) has-Been wounded to death! CIA kill 322 YouTube 666 x 322 x 666 --- NWO IMF CIA kill YouTube. - My --- CIAkillYourTubexIMFis Been erased, for HIS: name: has-Been closed, why, Declared: another crime committed. Against constitutional, by the Masonic system of the IMF. The account was closed CIAkillYourTubexIMF, but, God did not leave without me, lethal weapons

      CONVENTIONAL EXPLANATION FOR HUMAN ANTIQUITIES IN QUESTION

      Conventional anthropological explanations for human origins and descent are in serious disarray. Novel concepts have caught academic fancy and have been used as classroom discussion and numerous dissertation subjects. Historically these evolutionary explanations of anthropological descent have ranged from acquired characteristics, to natural selection, to selective cross-breeding, to mutations, to micro-mutations, to punctuated equilibrium.

      Fossil Record

      In the final analysis the fossil record itself must be consulted for any definitive analysis of human antiquities to hold a viable position in public or academic circles. Some recent observations have rendered standard anthropological interpretations suspect. Discover Magazine is endorsed by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. In its September 1986 issue an extraordinary skull found in Kenya and assigned an age of approximately 2.5 million years old has "overturned all previous notions of the course of early hominid evolution." The documented article continued to state "We no longer know who gave rise to whom - perhaps not even how, or when, we came into being.''1 Extensive text gives a summary explanation. In the extensive article author Pat Shipman, paleontologist at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, visually compares the new skull, known as KNM-WT 17000, with previously examined skulls of A.afarensis, A.africanus, A.robustus, H.habilis, H.erectus, and H.sapiens. Alan Walker, professor at Johns Hopkins school of medicine, discovered the skull in the extensive erosional exposures west of Lake Turkana in northern Kenya. In the midst of background explanations regarding hominid development the author encapsulates the academic weight of the new discovery:

      What the new skull does, in a single stroke, is overturn all previous notions of the course of early hominid evolution....The new skull, through its features and antiquity, strikes a blow against neat schemes and for messy biology...The new skull is clearly in the boisei lineage, but it's older than any of its putative robustus ancestors. Despite its antiquity, it's already specialized into a boisei. This is shown by its massive crests; its unusually long, dished face that's concave both top to bottom and side to side; the far forward placement of the root of the zygomatic (cheekbone); and anatomical details in the region around the nose and orbits.

      These features of the new skull show that robustus can be neither its ancestor (the new skull is older than robustus) nor its descendant (the new skull is more advanced). Thus Aboisei must be a distinct species, which is surprising since professionals have abandoned the use of boisei as insufficiently distinct from robustus.

      Another point is that the new boisei is most unlikely to be descended from any africanus. All known africanus skulls share many features that are derived, i.e., advanced, relative to the new skull, such as a moderate flexion or angling of the base of the cranium and a deep jaw joint with a bony lump in front of it. Not only must the notion of a single australopithecine lineage be abandoned, the idea that australopithecines became increasingly robust through time is also refuted.

      The new skull isn't just mildly robust, it's both the oldest and the most hyper-robust ever found. For example, the two teeth of the new skull- one complete and one broken in half rival the largest hominid teeth ever found. They're perhaps four or five tines as large as modern human molars. WT 17000 also has the largest cranial crests of any known hominid, a direct consequence of combining powerful muscles for working large teeth in a long, protruding face with a small braincase.

      ...The best answer we can give right now is that we no longer have a very clear idea of who gave rise to whom; we only know who didn't. This uncomfortable state of affairs can be summarized in three simple statements: (1) Robustus didn't evolve into boisei. (2) Africanus didn't evolve into boisei. Boisei didn't evolve into africanus or robustus. In fact, we don't even know what sort of "ancestral species" we're looking for.

      ...The extraordinary thing about WT 17000 is that it possesses primitive and highly specialized features in a combination that I, for one, would never have expected. The primitive features of the new boisei - found primarily in its braincase and jaw joint - are shared with afarensis, the most primitive hominid known. On the other hand, its derived features - mostly in the face and teeth - are shared with the later specimens of boisei, the most specialized australopithecine known. How can the new skull resemble one species in the face and another in the braincase, if face and braincase work so closely together as a functional complex?

      There are three possible solutions that would help reconcile the dichotomies. The first is that primitive features, like those shared by afarensis and the new boisei, are of little help in determining evolutionary, or phylogenic relationships. This would be disconcerting. Much of the phylogeny rests on grouping species with like features, and then assigning relationships based on whether those features are primitive or derived. If primitive features don't count for much, then much of taxonomic methodology must be rethought.

      The second solution is more complicated. Perhaps afarensis is incorrectly reconstructed, with the braincase of robust hominids united with the faces of more gracile, or slightly built, forms. The problem arises because there's only one reasonably complete cranium of afarensis in which continuous bone connects the face to the braincase. The specimen is a young child from Hadar. Young juveniles of numerous species are difficult to classify, since many distinctive morphological features haven't yet developed.

      ...The last alternative is that perhaps afarensis braincases were attached to the known, gracile faces and this lineage only later evolved the massive faces and teeth of boisei. This would imply that our understanding of the functioning and biomechanics of the craniofacial complex is sadly inadequate. It would be at least as disconcerting as finding out that primitive features can't be used to determine lineage.

      ...Finally, we could assert that we have no evidence whatsoever of where Homo arises from and remove all members of the genus Australopithecus from the hominid family, despite the fact that they're relatively large-brained and bipedal and have teeth extremely similar to Homo's....If the family Hominidae isn't defined by its brain size, tooth structure, or unusual locomotion pattern, then how can we define it at all?2

      This frustration exposed by Shipman is not in isolated context. Much is being written and, at last, publicly admitted as to the insufficient nature of standard anthropological explanations regarding human antiquities. Highly respected author Michael Denton views the problem as being insurmountable in terms of the evolutionary framework. In his preface he writes:

      Any suggestion that there might be something seriously wrong with the Darwinian view of nature is bound to excite public attention, for if biologists cannot substantiate the fundamental claims of Darwinism, upon which rests so much of the fabric of twentieth century thought, then clearly the intellectual and philosophical implications are immense. Small wonder, then, that the current tumult in biology is arousing such widespread interest.

      Basically there are two different philosophical approaches to the debate. On the one hand, one can adopt the conservative position and view the difficulties as essentially trivial, merely puzzling anomalies, that will be eventually reconciled somehow to the traditional framework. Alternatively, one can adopt a radical position and view the problems not as puzzles, but as counterinstances or paradoxes which will never be adequately explained within the orthodox framework, and indicative therefore of something fundamentally wrong with the currently accepted view of evolution.

      While most evolutionary biologists who have written recently about evolution concede that the problems are serious, nearly all take an ultimately conservative stand, believing that they can be explained away by making only minor adjustments to the Darwinian framework.

      In this book I have adopted the radical approach. By presenting a systematic critique of the current Darwinian model, ranging from paleontology to molecular biology, I have tried to show why I believe that the problems are too severe and too intractable to offer any hope of resolution in terms of the orthodox Darwinian framework, and that consequently the conservative view is no longer tenable.3

      In his exhaustive and scholarly examination of the fossil record and penetrative exploration in the field of microbiology Denton proceeds with parallel conclusions:

      ...It could well be that the total number of unique adaptive traits in, say, mammalian genomes is in the order of 1013 (1010 genes, each containing 103 significant bits of information). Which would pose what would seem to be an almost insurmountable "numbers problem" for Darwinian theory - a problem of such dimension that it would render all other anti-Darwinian arguments superfluous.4

      Microbiology

      Denton further relates the profound challenge offered by the incredible ingenuity and design observed in biological nature. Paley had offered the same concept a century earlier; however, superficial observations had rendered his findings nonessential in modern biological research. Recent scientific procedures operating on the molecular level have once again brought the original concept into sharp focus.

      Denton writes that "...it is not just the complexity of living systems which is so profoundly challenging, there is also the incredible ingenuity that is so often manifest in their design. Ingenuity in biological design is particularly striking when it is manifest in solutions to problems analogous to those met in our own technology."5

      Denton then proceeds to elaborate in specific areas. The eye, which was a marvel to Darwin, becomes an even greater marvel in the light of modern technology.

      Without the existence of the camera and telescope, much of the ingenuity in the design of the eye would not have been perceived....We now know the eye to be a far more sophisticated instrument than it appeared a hundred years ago. Electro-physiological studies have recently revealed very intricate connections among the nerve cells of the retina, which enable the eye to carry out many types of preliminary data processing of visual information before transmitting it in binary form to the brain. The cleverness of these mechanisms has again been underlined by their close analogy to the sorts of image intensiffcation and clarification processes carried out today by computers, such as those used by NASA, on images transmitted from space.6

      Students of anthropology are now taking comprehensive courses in molecular microbiology with surprised insight. Man is now seen to be more than a machine with ever-increasing organic complexity. He appears to have a comprehensive functional design in all of his components which cannot be explained by standard evolutionary anthropological concepts. A serious attempt at restructuring man's interpretation of himself is in order. Further documentation relating to the problem will be shown before offering a reconstruction.

      Information storage within the cells of the human brain, the central nervous system, and the immune system give vivid display, to the increasing suspicion that micro-evolution, or variation within existing genetic code of an organism, cannot explain the process by which the almost infinite capacity of the human cell could come into existence. In this area Denton comments that "it is at a molecular level where the analogy between the mechanical and biological worlds is so striking, that the genius of biological design and the perfection of the goals achieved are most pronounced. Take, for example, the problem of information storage, various solutions of which have been utilized in human societies.7 He elaborates:

      A chemical solution to the problem of information storage has, of course, been solved in living things by exploiting the properties of the long chain-like DNA polymers in which cells store their hereditary information. It is a superbly economical solution. The capacity of DNA to store information vastly exceeds that of any other known system; it is so efficient that all the information needed to specify an organism as complex as man weighs less than a few thousand millionths of a gram. The information necessary to specify the design of all the species of organisms which have ever existed on the planet, a number according to G.G. Simpson of approximately one thousand million, could be held in a teaspoon and there would still be room left for all the information in every book ever written.8

      The human biological system requires continuous well-timed supplies of organic compounds. These compounds must be made and distributed in exactingly correct amounts and locations. Biological design is continuously observed from manufacture, through distribution, and throughout assimilation in this vastly complicated biological facility we call man.

      The genius of biological design is also seen in the cell's capacity to synthesize organic compounds. Living things are capable of synthesizing exactly the same sorts of organic compounds as those synthesized by organic chemists. Each of the chemical operations necessary to construct a particular compound is carried out by a specific molecular machine known as an enzyme. Each enzyme is a single large protein molecule consisting of several thousand atoms linked together to form a particular spatial configuration which confers upon the molecule the capacity to carry out a unique chemical operation. When a number of enzymes are necessary for the assembly of a particular compound, they are arranged adjacent to each other so that, after each step in the operation, the partially completed compound can be conveniently passed to the next enzyme which performs the next chemical operation and so on until the compound is finally assembled. The process is so efficient that some compounds can be assembled in less than a second, while in many cases the same synthetic operations carried out by chemists, even in a well-equipped lab, would take several hours or days of even weeks.9

      It is not within reason to hope that standard evolutionary anthropological concepts could adequately account for this vast assemblage of efficiency; for the living, functioning life form requires the completed organic process to be alive at all. To live the organism must already be alive - this is the finding of current scientific inquiry. It may at first appear that this foregoing statement is an overstatement of the case, but let the qualified scholar Michael Denton express the same conclusion in his own words:

      In opening up this extraordinary new world of living technology biochemists have become fellow travelers with science fiction writers, explorers in a world of ultimate technology, wondering incredulously as new miracles of atomic engineering are continually brought to light in the course of their strange adventure into the microcosm of life.... The almost irresistible force of the analogy has completely undermined the complacent assumption, prevalent in biological circles over most of the past century, that the design hypothesis can be excluded on the grounds that the notion is fundamentally a metaphysical a priori concept and therefore scientifically unsound. On the contrary, the inference to design is a purely a posteriori induction based on ruthlessly consistent application of the logic of analogy. The conclusion may have religious implications, but it does not depend on religious presuppositions.10

      Data supporting the complexity and design of life at all levels, and especially that of man, loom larger than was previously supposed - as large in fact as the enormous "gaps" in the fossil record. These "gaps" in the fossil record of man's evolutionary development have never been filled, even with the most brilliant minds and sophisticated instruments of research ever assigned to the problem. The further we look into the complexity to the real world of man and his living companions, the more baffling and unexplainable, at least in standard evolutionary theory, the whole complex becomes. In spite of the insistence that "...all evolution is due to the accumulation of small genetic changes guided by natural selection and that transpecific evolution is nothing but an extrapolation and magnification of the events which take place within populations and species...[this concept] remains as unsubstantiated as it was one hundred and twenty years ago.11 These gaps have recently been readily admitted by leading theoretical scientists. "That the gaps cannot be dismissed as inventions of the human mind...is amply testified by the fact that their existence has always been just as firmly acknowledged by the advocates of evolution and continuity...it has been the evolutionists who have acknowledged their existence, who have sought them with such persistence.''12

      The paleontological and anthropological paradigm has remained a doctrinal dogma for over one hundred fifty years. The basic details have changed very little, the concept of continuity remains the same. Devotees hold to the paradigm with religious fervor, in spite of mounting evidence that scientific investigation, stripped of preconceptions, does not warrant the conclusion. "To the skeptic, the proposition that the genetic programmes of higher organisms consisting of something close to a thousand million bits of information, equivalent to the sequence of letters in a small library of a thousand volumes, containing in encoded form countless thousands of intricate algorithms controlling, specifying and ordering the growth and development of billions and billions of cells into the form of a complex organism, were composed by a purely random process is simply an affront to reason. But to the Darwinist the idea is accepted without a ripple of doubt - the paradigm takes precedence!''13

      Australopithecines

      Any discussion regarding human antiquities requires attention to specific fossil remains assigned as a contributing factor to man's ancestry. Standard anthropological research refers to the Australopithecines. Yet "the volume of the brain-case (i.e. 'endocranial volume') of the Australopithecines in those specimens where it can be ascertained with any degree of assurance (which is the only indication we have of the size of brain of these fossil creatures) is comfortably within the range found in extant great apes.''14 Physical anthropologist Sir Solly Zuckerman discusses the principles and implications of these fossils and comments that "This proposition is supposedly put forward to imply that whatever the absolute weight of their brains, the fossil creatures have enjoyed a higher 'cerebral status' than do the apes. So far as I can see, this argument has no significance at all. The brain/body weight ratio varies enormously in the Primates, and what is more, is far higher in some monkeys than it is in man. Furthermore, the ratio is very much higher in immature apes, monkeys and children than in adults....The only positive fact we have about the australopithecine brain is that it was no bigger than the brain of a gorilla...A recent paper by Holloway shows that even previously published figures for the size of the Australopithecine brain, on which the above comment is based, 'were highly overestimated'.''15

      Zuckerman continues with his painstaking and exhaustive research as a physical anthropologist with immense background and laboratory facilities within the African continent as he addresses the claims made in relation to the human character of the australopithecine face and jaws. He flatly states that these claims "are no more convincing than those made about the size of the brain. The australopithecine skull is in fact so overwhelmingly simian as opposed to human that the contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white.16

      Carriage of the head on the shoulders is likewise placed within the range on apes rather than approaching that of man. Bipedal characteristics are explored at length by Zuckerman. He continues:

      The particular characteristics we are studying were selected on the basis of an appraisal of the mechanics of the pelvis in quadrupedal Primates, that is to say animals like baboons, which move on all fours, in Primates which swing by their arms in the trees, for example gibbons, and in man with his upright gait. The characters we studied reflected the way the innominate bone becomes modified for these different types of locomotion....Australopithecus resembles not Homo Sapiens but the living monkeys and apes. In the Australopithecines the muscles could hardly have abducted the thigh and helped keep the pelvis in balance, which is a necessary condition for the human type of walking?17

      On November 20, 1986 Donald Johanson, discoverer of the celebrated "Lucy" fossil, lectured on the campus of the University, of Missouri, Kansas City. In the course of the lecture Dr. Johanson showed a slide which suggested that Lucy's knee joint had an angle much like a selected human knee joint. In the discourse which followed the lecture the discoverer admitted that he had found that portion of the fossil 60 to 70 meters [over 200 feet] lower in the strata and two to three kilometers [1.24 to 1.86 miles] away. Anatomical similarity appeared to be his basis for placing it with the rest of Lucy's skeletal remains. Her arm/leg length ratio, listed at 83.9%, is admittedly based on an estimated leg length. The left pelvic bone is complete, but "distorted" according to her discoverer.

      Negative evidence relating to Lucy's claim as a genuine hominid continues to mount. Her chimp-shaped skull of only 400 cc's and many osteological features certainly indicate that walking erect was very unlikely. Possible erect locomotion is indicated by only one angled view of her pelvis, and the pelvis was distorted when found. A long list of ape features are indicated by the skeletal remains.18 This specimen had curved fingers and toes for tree climbing, an ape-type angle of the shoulder socket, a chimp-like iliac blade, an ape ankle bone (talus). The valgus angle of the knees is similar to the orangutan and the spider monkey, a feature which is also found in man. Strong chimp affinities are shown in her hip joint. She may well have walked with flat feet like the chimpanzee.19 According to J. Cherfas her ankle bone (talus) angles backward like a gorilla. This makes it impossible for her to locomote bipedally. Zihnman called our attention to the fact that there is astonishing similarity between Lucy and the pygmy chimps.20

      Supposedly the human line began about fourteen million years ago with Ramapithecus. But, with the discovery of an increasing number of fossils the evidence accumulated that this "original ancestor" was simply a member of the orangutan group. Zihnman and Lowenstein even call him a "false start of the human race.21

      Some authorities have pointed out that Homo erectus has now changed status, and is, in fact, a small form of Neanderthal. Some authorities, such as Andrews, now classify H.erectus and H.sapiens as the same species.22 It is now generally conceded that erectus is human, but with somewhat primitive features such as prognathous face and large supraorbital ridges. In his adult form H.erectus' brain capacity was within the modern sapiens range, varying from about 900 cc's to about 1100 cc's. In 1984 Richard Leakey found a young erectus male of about twelve years of age when he died. This individual was 5 feet 4 inches tall, with a brain size of about 850 cc's, and the near complete skeletal remains clearly showed that he walked fully erect. His total features, including brain size and height, fall completely within the range of modern human beings of that age. This specimen had a large brow ridge and a sloping forehead. In this connection Arthur Custance published a paper which certainly showed beyond reasonable doubt that "a diet of fruit, tough seeds, fibrous material, etc. in the formative years, especially if there was a lack of bone hardening content, would result in constant heavy chewing which would cause depressing of the forehead, render the brow ridges more prominent and force outward the zygomatic arch, thus accentuating the cheek bones.23

      It is interesting to note that the talus of Homo habilis has been found to fall in the Australopithecine group rather than that of man. Writing from Cambridge University Press, Graham Clark boldly stated "...there would be no problem from a paleontological point of view in downgrading habilis to a variety of Australopithecus africanus.24 Recent examination of the finger bones of this fossil has led scientiststo conclude that the H.habilis hand was, according to Susman and Stern, "similar in overall configuration to chimpanzees and female gorillas.25 Recently, with the discovery of a relatively complete arm, a partial thighbone and part of a shin researchers were startled to find that habilis was far more ape-like than had been assumed. With this new reconstruction this creature had arms about ninety-five percent the length of its legs, very heavily-built bones like modern apes, and a height of about three feet.

      To complicate an already confusing scenario, it was not long after the discovery of Zinianthropus (Australopithecus boisei) that the Leakeys discovered a true human fossil buried at the very bottom of the Olduvai Gorge.26 In the display of ancestral human fossils it appears that Shipman was correct in her contention that "We could assert that we have no evidence whatsoever of where Homo arises from and remove all members of the genus Australopithecus from the hominid family. ...If the family Hominidae isn't defined by its brain size, tooth structure, or unusual locomotion pattern, then how can we define it at all?"27

      Speech Adaptation

      Hard data from fossil bones must be evaluated, but much more is involved in our approach to reconstructing man's descent. Robert Finn, specialist in psychobiology, exposes an additional problem area of speech adaption.

      Humans are the only animals that possess the biological machinery needed for speech. Chimpanzees may learn sign language, and honeybees may dance out a message to the hive, but only people speak to each other in words....Some careful work in comparative anatomy is revealing just how special the human vocal apparatus is. [Quoting anatomist Jeffrey Laitman of Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City] "Human speech is a two-part system. You must have the brain for it and you must have the vocal tract for it. Apes are very intelligent primates. They certainly have an advanced communication system. But do they have the ability to produce speech? The answer is no." Other primates have vocal cords much like ours [but]...the uniqueness of the human vocal apparatus lies less in the organs themselves than in their location. The larynx is lower than in the standard plan [i.e.,possessed by other primates], making the larynx larger; and the tongue, which in the standard plan lies entirely within the mouth, extends down into the throat....Animals with standard-plan vocal tracts, including dogs, cats, apes and human infants, have a skull base that's relatively flat. But human adults and children older than six years have a deep arch in the center of the skull base. [Quoting Yale University anatomist Edmund Crelin] 'The distance between the hard palate and the foramen magnum, the opening through which the spinal cord passes to join the brain, gradually decreases so that the skull base buckles into an arch." The deeper the arch, the farther the larynx has descended.

      Since the base of the skull is often preserved in fossilized remains, the researchers could now reconstruct the speech organs of our early ancestors. These reconstructions indicate that the australopithecines, who are thought to have lived between 4 million and 1.5 million years ago, possessed the standard-plan vocal tract. Thus, the famous fossil known as Lucy would not have been able to speak as we do today. Quoting Laitmanl 'The first evidence that the vocal anatomy had begun to change appears in forms such as Homo erectus.' 28

      Acknowledged scholarship at major universities and centers of research has compiled a near-avalanche of materials admitting to the problems in standard anthropological explanations. The problems extend throughout the fossil record; the data is baffling to explain in all areas of the evolutionary paradigm. David Pilbeam, with extensive expertise in the field of paleoanthropology, wrote in Human Nature that discoveries since 1976 had shaken his view of human origins and forced a change in ideas of man's early ancestors. He admitted that his previous views were wrong about tool use replacing canine teeth. He did not believe any longer that he was likely to hit upon the true or correct story of the origin of man. He observed that our theories have clearly reflected our current ideologies instead of the actual data.29 Colin Patterson of the British Museum of Natural History was asked, "What do you think of the Australopithecines as man's ancestors?" To which he replied, "There is no way of knowing whether we are the ancestors to anything or not."30

      Paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey appeared on the final Walter Cronkite Universe program. Leakey asserted that if he were going to draw a family tree of man, he would just draw a huge question mark. He added that the fossil evidence was too scanty for us to possibly know man's evolutionary origin, and he did not think we were ever going to know it.

      The book, The Bone Peddlers, was written by William Fix. In this work he explained in great detail what most prominent evolutionary paleontologists have written about each of the fossils that have been claimed to display evidence of man's ancestry. Fix then showed how further studies and more recent discoveries have eliminated each of man's supposed apelike ancestors. Fix candidly wrote:

      The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely known that those who insist on positive declarations can do nothing more than jump from one hazardous surmise to another and hope that the next dramatic discovery does not make them utter fools....There are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have the temerity to tell us that there is 'no doubt' how man originated. If only they had the evidence....

      I have gone to some trouble to show that there are formidable objections to all the subhuman and near-human species that have been proposed as ancestors.31

      It is not surprising that professor Derek Ager wrote, "It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as a student...have now been 'debunked.'32 Perhaps Norman Macbeth, in his September 1983 Harvard University debate with Kenneth Miller, summed it up appropriately. He starts at the beginning of the geologic column discussing the trilobite and his eye. His conclusion has far-reaching implications:

      One example of this is the little animal called the trilobite. There are a great many fossils of the trilobite right there at the beginning with no build-up to it. And, if you examine them closely, you will find that they are not simple animals. They are small, but they have an eye that has been discussed a great deal in recent years, an eye that is simply incredible. It is made up of dozens of little tubes which are all at slightly different angles so that it covers the entire field of vision, with a different tube pointing at each spot on the horizon. But these tubes are all more complicated than that, by far. They have a lens on them that is optically arranged in a very complicated way, and it is bound into another layer that has to be just exactly right for them to see anything....But the more complicated it is, the less likely it is simply to have grown up out of nothing. And this situation has troubled everybody from the beginning - to have everything at the very opening of the drama. The curtain goes up and you have the players on the stage already, entirely in modern costumes. [Emphasis added]33

      It would appear that the problem we have at the top of the paradigm began at the bottom of the geologic column - that of complicated, specialized functional organisms without a trace as to formidable origins explanation.

      REFERENCES

      Cover Display, September 1986, Discover Magazine

      Shipman, Pat. September 1986, Discover Magazine, pp 86-93.

      Denton, Michael, 1985. Evolution: A Theory In Crisis. Adler & Adler, Bethesda, Maryland. p.16.

      Ibid., p.332

      Ibid., p.332

      Ibid., pp.332,333

      Ibid., p.333

      Ibid., p.334

      Ibid., p.334

      Ibid., pp.340,341

      Ibid., p.344

      Ibid., p.345

      Ibid., p.351

      Ashton, E.H. and Spence, T.F. 1958. Age changes in the cranial capacity and foramen magnum of Hominoids. Ptoc.zool.Soc.Lond. p.130

      Zuckerman, Sir Solly. 1970. Beyond The Ivory Tower. Tapingler Publishing Company, New York. p.78

      Ibid., p.78

      Ibid., p.90

      Cherfas, J., 1983. Trees Have Made Man Upright, New Scientist 97:172-178

      Ibid., p.174

      Zihlman, A., 1984. Pygmy Chimps, People And The Pundits, New Scientist, 104:39-40.

      Zihlman, A. and Lowenstein, J.M., 1979. False Start of The Human Race. Natural History, 88 (7):86-91

      Andrews, P., 1984. The Descent of Man, New Scientist, 102:25

      Custance, Arthur. 1975. The Doorway Papers, Genesis and Early Man, Zonderman. Grand Rapids, p.183

      Clark, G., 1977. World Pre-History In New Perspective, 3rd. edition, Cambridge, Universitv Press. so.5.22

      Susman, R., and Stern, J., 1982. Functional Morphology Of Homo Habilis, Science, September 3, 1982

      Booth, Ernest, 1979. Ancient Man Of Olduvai, Outdoor Pictures, Anacortes, Washington, p.2

      Shipman, Pat. September 1986, Discover Magazine, p.93

      Finn, Robert. August 1985, Science Digest, pp.52-64

      Pilbeam, David. June 1978. Rearranging Our Family Tree, Human Events, pp.39-45

      Sunderland, Luther. 1986. Darwin's Enigma, Master Books, Santee, California, p.87

      Fix, William R. 1984. The Bone Peddlers, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, pp.150-153

      Ager, Derek. 1985. Proc. Geol. Assoc., Vol. 87, p.132

      Macbeth, Norman. 1983. vs. Kenneth Miller, Harvard University Debate, 24 September

      © Copyright by Carl E. Baugh, 1989