Page 20 - The Skulls That Demolish Darwin

THE SKULLS THAT DEMOLISH DARWIN

lutionary sequence and family trees. But the structural differences in fossil skulls are no evi-
dence of evolution: These skulls belong either to extinct species of apes, or else to various hu-
man races that once existed. It is entirely logical that skulls belonging to different human ra-
ces should display structural differences. Different species of fish have differently shaped
heads. For example, the head shape of a trout bears no resemblance to that of an eel, although
both are fish. Similarly, there may be differences between the skulls of different human races.
It is perfectly natural that there should be differences in the eye sockets, forehead struc-
tures, muscular structures and skull volumes between Pygmies and
British people, Russians and Chinese, Australian Aborigines and
Eskimos, Negroes and Japanese But these differences do not
mean that one race is descended from another, or is more prim-
itive or more advanced than another. An aboriginal race will al-
ways maintain the same distinctive features for as long as it
does not intermarry with members of another race. No matter
how much time passes, these human beings will never evolve
in such a way as to acquire different characteristics. Their skull
volumes will not become any larger than they are now, and
they will not acquire different anatomi-
cal structures.
For example, various
Many species of ape have existed over
Malaysian native peoples living
the course of geologic history, and the
today possess the same large great majority of them have since be-
muscular protrusions and back- come extinct. Darwinists use these ex-
tinct apes’ skulls to engage in various
ward-slanting brow structure kinds of speculation.
as that of the skulls of Homo
erectus, which evolution-

8
1 18 H Harun Yahya
n
u
a
y
a
r
Y

h
a