Page 563 - Atlas of Creation Volume 2

Harun Yahya

The Sumerian Civilization

In describing the supposed "evolutionary march" of the history of mankind, Darwinist scientists are

quite helpless on another subject: Man's mind, by which mankind has built universities, hospitals, factories
and states, composed music, held the Olympic Games and traveled into space—in short, one of the most im-
portant characteristics that makes Man what he is.

Evolutionists maintain that human mind assumed its present capacities by evolving after Man diverged
from chimpanzees, our so-called closest living relative. They ascribe the alleged leaps that took place in the
mind's evolution to random changes occurring in the brain, and to the improving effect of tool-making
skills. You'll frequently encounter such claims in television documentaries and in articles in magazines and
newspapers, telling tall tales concerning ape-men who first learned how to make knives out of stone, and

then spears. But this propaganda is not valid. Although they attempt to portray the scenarios they set out as
scientific, they are actually based solely upon Darwinist preconceptions, and completely unscientific. The
most important point of all is that human mind cannot be reduced to matter. By documenting the invalidity

of materialism, this fact alone totally undermines any claims regarding the evolution of mind.
Evolutionists maintain that mind emerged through evolution, but they have no means of experiencing
what a primitive level of intelligence is like, nor of replicating the conditions in the supposed evolutionary
process. Despite his being an evolutionist, Henry Gee, editor of Nature magazine, well known for its evolu-
tionist content, openly admits the unscientific nature of such claims:

For example, the evolution of Man is said to have been driven by improvements in posture, brain size, and the co-

ordination between hand and eye, which led to technological achievements such as fire, the manufacture of tools,
and the use of language. But such scenarios are subjective. They can never be tested by experiment, and so they
are unscientific. They rely for their currency not on scientific test, but on assertion and the authority of their pre-
sentation. 61

Besides being unscientific, such scenarios are also logically invalid. Evolutionists maintain that thanks to
the intellect that supposedly emerged through evolution, the ability to use tools emerged and developed,
thanks to which, in turn, intelligence developed. Yet such a development is possible only when human in-

telligence is already present. According to this account, the question of whether technology or mind first
emerged through evolution goes unanswered.
Phillip Johnson, one of the most effective critics of Darwinism, writes this on the subject:

A theory that is the product of a mind can never adequately explain the mind that produced the theory. The story
of the great scientific mind that discovers absolute truth is satisfying only so long as we accept the mind itself as
a given. Once we try to explain the mind as a product of its own discoveries, we are in a hall of mirrors with no
exit. 62

The fact that Darwinists are quite unable to account for their own
human minds reveals that the claims they make about Man's cultural and
social history are also invalid. Indeed, all the facts and findings we have re-

viewed so far makes Darwinists' claims regarding the "evolution of history"
totally meaningless.
Contrary to what evolutionists claim, the history of mankind is full of
proofs that ancient peoples possessed far superior technologies and civi-

lizations than had been believed. One of these civilizations is that of the
Sumerians. The artifacts they left behind are some of the proofs of the accu-
mulated knowledge possessed by mankind thousands of years ago.

Phillip Johnson

Adnan Oktar 561