Page 89 - Once Upon a Time There Was Darwinism

Harun Yahya
(Adnan Oktar)

University professor Richard Lewontin, admits
that Darwinism has fallen into a hopeless situation:

When we consider the remote past, before the origin of the actual
species Homo sapiens, we are faced with a fragmentary and discon-
nected fossil record. Despite the excited and optimistic claims that
have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species
can be established as our direct ancestor. 31
Many other evolutionist experts in this matter recently stated

their pessimism about their theory. Henry Gee, for example, edi-
tor of the well-known magazine Nature, points out:
To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not
a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that car-
ries the same validity as a bedtime story—-amusing, perhaps even
instructive, but not scientific. 32
The classic "human family tree" is being seriously criticized
today. Scientists investigating the evidence without preconcep-
tions assert that the line of descent from Australopithecus to Homo

sapiens that evolutionists put forth is a total concoction, and the in-
between species called Homo habilis and Homo erectus are imagi-
nary.
In a 1999 article published in Science magazine, evolutionist
paleontologists Bernard Wood and Mark Collard present their
view that the H. habilis and H. rudolfensis are concocted categories
and that fossils included in these categories should be transferred
to the genus Australopithecus. 33
Milford Wolpoff of the University of Michigan and the

University of Canberra's Alan Thorne share the opinion
that H. erectus is a fabricated category and fossils
included in this classification are all varia-
tions of H. sapiens. 34

87