| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Evidence Suggests That Charles Darwin’s Theory Of Human Evolution Is Wrong
Follow TIS on Twitter: @Truth_is_Scary & Like TIS of Facebook- facebook.com/TruthisScary
We are aware that this is a controversial topic, with lots of information to look at. This is a tidbit, and we just wanted to express our belief that there are still many undiscovered truths to be uncovered when it comes to the *theory* of evolution. We are not suggesting that evolution did not or has not occurred in nature, because we have enough evidence to conclude that it did.
Darwin’s work was definitely well thought out, well documented, and scientifically sound, but the evolutionary process that he documented in nature may not apply to us. There is a growing body of evidence proving that Darwin’s theory does not account for the facts of human origin as they’re known today.
There has been a widespread acceptance of the theory of evolution, yet no mention of the evidence which counters its claim. Instead, we’ve watched a lengthy search for physical evidence to prove it, while failing to realize that the fossilized “missing links” which should exist to prove the theory correct do not exist at all, or remain to be discovered. These “missing links” in our human ancestry have not been discovered for more than 150 years now, and even Darwin himself acknowledged this fact in his book, On The Origin of Species:
“As on the theory of natural selection and interminable number of intermediate forms must have existed….why do we not see these linking forms all around us? Why is not every geological formation charged with such links? We meet with no such evidence, and this is the most obvious and forcible of the many objections which may be urged against my theory.” (1)
This has also been expressed by many scholars, one of them being Thomas H. Morgan, a 1933 Nobel Prize winner in physiology and medicine, who stated that applying the “most rigid tests used to distinguish wild species, we do not know of a single instance of the transformation of one species into another.” (2)
Why have we found so much, searched so much, found so much, yet failed to discover these “missing links?”
Make no mistake, while Australopithecus afarensis and Neanderthals do tell a story and provide some interesting fossils, it’s possible they are not linked to us. They might be telling the story of someone’s history and evolution, yes, but it might not be ours.
Keeping in mind the fact that we have no physical evidence to prove the theory of evolution correct, let’s take a look at some research which has many scientists scratching their heads.
The Research
In 2000, researchers at the University of Glasgow Human Identification Centre compared DNA from a species believed to be our ancestor, a Neanderthal, and compared it to the DNA of modern humans. The DNA taken from the Neanderthal was very well preserved (a story in itself), as it was found frozen in a limestone cave in northern Caucasus. It was 30,000 years old, and it also marked the very first time that such tests could be performed on a body that had already been carbon-dated.
The study concluded that the possibility of a genetic link between Neanderthals and modern day human beings is unlikely, and the study went on to suggest that modern humans are not at all descendants of Neanderthals, as is so commonly believed.(3)(4)
“While in theory the science of genetic comparison should solve the mystery of our ancestry, the results are actually raising more questions regarding our evolutionary lineage and origins, and opening the door to ‘forbidden’ territory.” - Greg Braden (Deep Truth p. 9)
In 2003, a team of European scientists compared the DNA of Neanderthals and our earliest known ancestors, Early Modern Humans (EMHs). EMHs used to be called “Cro-Magnon.” The researchers studied the DNA of two EMHs, one was 23,000 years old and the other was 25,000 years old. DNA from four Neanderthals was also used, they were between 29,000 and 42,000 years old. The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and stated:
Source: http://truthisscary.com/2015/03/evidence-suggests-that-charles-darwins-theory-of-human-evolution-is-wrong/
Humans lack a Chromosome meaning we must be inferior to Chimps and Neanderthals who have 48, in a species with an evolutionary tree the simpler the organism the nearer the root of the evolutionary tree therefore it has less Chromosomes in its DNA through evolution, we may be the ancestor to the Orang U tang and a living fossil which got lucky.
ii.e. Read like the Chinese and start the Diagram from the Right.
These beings, the Anunnaki (the giant humanoid gods, male & female), were declared as ‘their makers”, and, in “their image” Sumerians were made on a “smaller” scale.
Sumerians were genetically made specifically to mine gold for the giant humanoid gods, male & female, that were present with them physically.
The giant humanoid gods, male & female, used part of their DNA combined with Neanderthal Humanoids that were native to the planet at that time in history.
The result was the genetically modified lab created humanoid we identify as “Sumerians”, the “Origins” of Modern Man, and “his” civilization!
There is NO “missing link” in the evolutionary development of modern man.
“”The researchers studied the DNA of two EMHs, one was 23,000 years old and the other was 25,000 years old.”"
—————————
All this shows is that the act of interbreeding hadn’t yet occurred in the specimens studied (as it has not in many people alive today). If they are so retarded as to have not been able to figure that out then there is probably not much point listening to them.
The chance of the first cell assembling itself from non living material and springing to life is less than one in a number bigger than all the atoms in the known universe. High school biology and some math:
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message3085506/pg1