Page 159 - Death of the Darwinist Dajjal System

Adnan Oktar (Harun Yahya)

Darwinists produced a creature identical to the present-day Bonobo chimpanzee
and gave it the name "Ardi." And then they said; “All right, it may be a chimpanzee,
but it stands upright!” This is one rather primitive example of the Darwinist decep-
tion we know so well.
Discovered in 1994, the fossil skeleton was in a fragmented form when first found.
The pelvic bone in particular was in tiny pieces and was exceedingly brittle the mo-
ment paleontologists picked it up. Darwinists took these minute pieces with no clear
shape and reconstructed a pelvic bone just as they desired.
Darwinists carefully chose this fossil they produced only 15 years later. It was
easy to speculate about a “fragmented” fossil, even though they had no transitional
forms in their possession. The Darwinist William Jungers, head of the anatomical sci-
ences department at the Long Island, Stony Brook University Medical Center, says
this on the subject:
“It's very difficult not to make them look like something you have in your mind if
there's any chance of play… Ardi, requires a lot of guesswork.”
The inward-facing big toe on Ardi's feet and a foot bone absent from human be-
ings are the most distinctive proofs that the creature did not walk upright. After ex-
amining the fossil, Jungers said, " “there is no way that they could belong to ‘an ani-
mal that wasn’t often walking on its hind legs’ unless the data ‘were deliberately ig-
nored or if we had made them up’.”
Tim White, a Darwinist from the University of California, who suggested that
Ardi might represent the missing link in human evo-
lution, also had to make the following admission in
the face of the facts that emerged regarding the fossil:
"There are no apparent features sufficiently
unique to warrant the exclusion of Ar. ramidus
(Ardi) as being ancestral to Australopithecus.”
Darwinists’ claims regarding Ardi are in fact sig-
nificant evidence of the despairing situation in which
they find themselves. Even if they fall into a hugely
embarrassing situation, Darwinists have to repeat
these feeble claims for the sake of their perverse
Darwinist ideology.

Source: Katherine Harmon, How Humanlike Was "Ardi"?,
Scientific American, 19 November 2009

157