Page 120 - Love in the Torah

118 L LOVE IN THE TORAH

tionists devise an imaginary evolution scheme by arranging different
fossils of these creatures in a particular order. This scheme is imagi-
nary because it has never been proven that there is any evolutionary
relationship between these different classes.
By outlining the chain’s links as Australopithecus > Homo habilis >
Homo erectus > Homo sapiens, evolutionists imply that each of these
species is another’s ancestor. However, recent findings of paleoan-
thropologists have revealed that Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and
Homo erectus all lived at different parts of the world at the same time
(Alan Walker, Science, vol. 207, 7 March 1980, p. 1103; A. J. Kelso,
Physical Anthropology, 1st ed., J. B. Lipincott Co., New York, 1970, p.
221; M. D. Leakey, Olduvai Gorge, vol. 3, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1971, p. 272).
Moreover, a certain segment of humans classified as Homo erec-
tus have lived up until very modern times. Homo erectus and Homo
sapiens co-existed in the same region and era. (Jeffrey Kluger, “Not So
Extinct After All,” Time, 24 June 2001)
This situation indicates the invalidity of the claim that they are
ancestors of one another. The late Stephen Jay Gould explained this
deadlock of the theory of evolution, although he was himself one of
the leading advocates of evolution in the twentieth century:
What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids
(A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly de-
rived from another? Moreover, none of the three display any evolutionary
trends during their tenure on earth. (S. J. Gould, Natural History, vol. 85,
1976, p. 30)
Put briefly, the scenario of human evolution, which is “upheld”
with the help of various drawings of some “half ape, half human”
creatures appearing in the media and textbooks, that is, frankly, prop-
aganda, is nothing but a tale with no scientific foundation.
Lord Solly Zuckerman, one of the most famous and respected