Acts 17:26 “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;”
‘It has always been my contention, in the sermons and presentations which I give, that talk about human evolution can be dangerous. Why so?
The first problem in the discussion is the equivocal way in which evolutionists use the term evolution. In a linguistic sense, it can simply mean change. So, it could be noted that characteristics of one population of humans has changed over time. This could be described linguistically as evolution. But it is not biological evolution. To a biologist, Darwinian evolution must involve mutations which produce new and better genetic information, which, over time and natural selection, will improve the population. Such novel genetic information is not, in practice, actually seen, but this does not seem to stop biologists referring to the evolution of human beings in an unfortunate manner.
Evolutionary articles are wont to describe changes in skin pigmentation as evolution. Describing such changes as “evolution” can be risky because it can easily lead to discussion of which skin pigmentation is “better” and more highly evolved. One can see how such discussion can lead to racist conclusions.
Matthew 16:2 “He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, [It will be] fair weather: for the sky is red.”
‘One good test of whether a theory is scientific is whether the theory can accurately predict new and surprising findings. If you have a barometer, you may do this all the time. The sky may be clear, but the barometer is falling fast. No matter how nice the weather looks, you know that rain is likely.
Creation scientists believe that humans have been on Earth in their present so-called “modern” form ever since the model first came out. Since that was on day six of creation, humans have been on Earth as long as any creature. So creation scientists have predicted that as we find more fossils, we will find fossils of “modern man” in older and older rocks. Such a discovery would shock the evolutionists!
Evolutionists say that, according to their theory, “modern” humans have been around for only a small part of the world’s history. In their inflated estimate, they say we have been here for only 35,000 years. Evolutionists received a surprise when that age recently had to be almost tripled. A new discovery pushed the date for “modern” humans back 92,000 years. As a result, evolutionists had to admit that we turn out to be older than some of the creatures from which we were supposed to have evolved!
Of course, one has to take the hot air out of those evolutionary dates. They can be adjusted down to a number that fits the biblical calendar. However, the scientific prediction made by creation scientists has proven out. And creationists are predicting that the history of “modern” humanity will continue to be pushed back further and further!
‘The existence of humans suggests that, at some point, there must have been a first human. Neither evolutionists nor creationists deny this. However, creationists believe that Adam (Genesis 1–2) was the first human. But whether the first human was Adam or some unnamed, recently-evolved person, where did that person learn to speak?
Evidence suggests that humans do not learn to speak unless they are taught by someone who already knows how to speak. Additionally, the archaeological record indicates that fully-developed languages have been in existence as long as humans have been (Elgin 1973, 44). For these reasons, Curtis, in a 1990 article, argues that a personal creator was responsible for the existence of the first human.
Linguistic Evidence
Linguistic research suggests that languages have not evolved from a prehistoric development period (Eglin 1973, 44). Rather, languages have always existed with the same communication potential as they currently possess. In fact, it is possible that they even held greater communication potential in the past.
An example of an inscribed clay tablet
Archaeological Evidence
The archaeological finds from the past 100 years of excavations have demonstrated that written language appears well developed in the earliest records of civilization. For example, the Ebla tablets date to about 2000 BC. These tablets contain writing in a fully-developed, phonetic language.
How Do People Learn How to Speak?
Some Darwinian anthropologists have suggested that if, in the process of evolution, there was a transition from animal to man, this transition would have included the acquisition of language. However, one of these anthropologists, Humbolt, realized that man cannot speak without already being human. For him, this created an unsolvable problem regarding the origin of speech (Lyell 1873).
Another problem with determining the origin of speech from an evolutionary perspective is that in so-called primitive cultures, the languages tend to be more complex than in more advanced cultures. Furthermore, animals with the physical capability to use logical speech do not do so. Studies have shown that animals that respond to commands do so based on vocal tones rather than the spoken words. Thus, all attempts to solve the evolutionary origin of language have failed.
Every child that learns how to speak learns from someone who already knows how to speak. There do not seem to be any exceptions to this rule. Feral children who grow up without contact with spoken language did not learn to speak until they came into contact with speaking individuals. Once they had heard speech, they were able to learn how to speak (Tomb 1925).
What Does this All Mean?
Since multiple languages appear to have existed in fully developed forms in the earliest known civilizations, it appears that the languages do not have one common root. Rather, each language appeared independently of the others.
This evidence aligns well with the biblical account. From the creation of Adam until the Tower of Babel, there was only one language on earth (Genesis 11:1). Curtis suggests that God taught the first man, Adam, to speak. It is clear that Adam spoke a well-developed language because he was able to name the animals (Genesis 2:19). From that point on, each generation learned to speak from the previous one.
Later, when God confused the languages at the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:7), He miraculously created a number of additional unrelated, fully-formed languages. The pattern of language learning continued. Each person learned to speak from the previous generation.
Conclusion
The scientific evidence obtained through linguistic and archaeological studies suggest that the first human who learned how to speak must have learned from someone who already possessed the capability of speech. This first person must have learned from someone of a higher order than humans. This correlates well with the biblical account of God’s creation of Adam. Adam must have received the ability and knowledge to speak from God himself. The study of language demonstrates that there must be a creator God. No human can speak a language unless that person has been taught. Furthermore, languages have not arisen from some lesser forms of communication. They appeared early in history, fully developed. The languages present today do not share a common root, suggesting that they appeared as separate, well-developed languages. This accords well with the account of the Tower of Babel.
References
Curtis, William M. 1990. “Human Language Demands a Creator.” The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism 2:1, 69–72.
Elgin, Suzette H. 1973. What is Linguistics? Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc.
1 Corinthians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.”
‘If God created, but He did so by evolution, it means that there were many generations and billions of deaths before the first man appeared on the scene. Does Scripture say anything about this?
Indeed it does! In fact, the whole plan of salvation rests on the fact that there was no death before the first man. This truth is found throughout Scripture, but nowhere is it more clear than in 1 Corinthians 15:22. Here we read, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” This means that if death did not begin with, and because of, Adam’s sin, then by the same token no one is made alive in Christ. The way it is phrased in this passage, one depends on the other. If there were generations of death in the world before Adam, then death is not tied to Adam’s sin. And if death is not tied to Adam’s sin, then life is not tied to Christ.
In other words, if there were death before Adam and therefore generations before Adam, Christ’s work turns out to be of no effect. So you see, even evolution with God added to it questions the Bible’s message about the saving work of Christ.
Isaiah 44:8 “Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared [it]? ye [are] even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, [there is] no God; I know not [any].”
‘It has been said that if you take a frog and turn it into a man by adding a kiss, you have a fairy tale. But if you take a frog and turn it into a man by adding millions of years, you have science. It seems that many people think if you add millions of years, the impossible becomes possible.
Even the most committed evolutionists admit that our knowledge of how things work makes it hard to explain how life could develop all by itself from nonliving stuff.
The late George Wald, who taught biology at Harvard, said just this in an article in Scientific American. He was marveling at life and all of its complex systems when he penned some of the most famous words ever offered by an evolutionist. He wrote: “The time with which we have to deal here is of the order of 2 billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, and the probable becomes virtually certain. One has only to wait, time itself performs the miracles.”
‘Charles Darwin himself shuddered at the thought that evolutionary processes had to explain human vision. He said, ‘To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”‘https://www.creationstudies.org/articles/theory-of-evolution/114-darwin-versus-the-human-eye
People may scoff at those who believe the Bible to be the very Words of the Living Creator God but it is they who are proven over and over to be wrong. If they would only believe when it is said that He …hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth… Acts 17:26. Belief in that statement would have seen history changed. The Holocaust would not have occurred along with many other atrocities against mankind. Darwinism is not a friend but a foe, an enemy! The article below states that ‘In the Germanic countries at this time, “Darwinian rhetoric was widely accepted within medical circles and a discussion about race also ensued among eugenically inclined members of the . . . medical community.” https://assets.answersingenesis.org/doc/articles/pdf-versions/arj/v13/jewish_inferiority_skeleton.pdf
‘Dogs don’t read the words on a page. Neither did Coco, the famous gorilla that learned to communicate using simple hand signs.So what affords humans the unique ability to read and write, and why do we do it? These kinds of questions drive Zeynep Saygin’s research at Ohio State. Her team’s recent discovery sets the stage for some answers.
Brain experts already knew about the visual cortex—an area of the brain where neurons fire as we interpret faces, shapes, and words. But Saygin’s group seeks to understand what happens in our brains as we learn to read.
The team compared functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data sets from 40 newborns to similar scans of 40 adults. fMRI shows neuron activity within the brain, so the comparison would indicate if baby brains come into the world already equipped with the wiring necessary to perceive and process letters later in life.
Literate adults have close connections between the part of the brain that processes the sight of letters, called the visual word form area (VWFA), and the brain’s nearby language network. The researchers discovered that newborn brains come prewired with similarly tight connections between the two areas.
They published their discovery in Scientific Reports.1
Saygin, the senior author of the study, told Ohio State News, “Even at birth, the VWFA is more connected functionally to the language network of the brain than it is to other areas. It is an incredibly exciting finding.”2
Lead author Jin Li said, “It’s interesting to think about how and why our brains develop functional modules that are sensitive to specific things like faces, objects, and words.”2
Why indeed?
From a Darwinian perspective, our brains’ functional modules would have incrementally developed over eons for our survival. But in what scenario would our ancestors have been forced to read or die? For that matter, how could such pressures reach into and rewire our brains?
On the other hand, if humans came from supernatural creation instead of mere nature, then the possibility opens for God to have intentionally prewired our brains “to see words.”2 And why would a Creator do that?
Reading is the key to understanding the most important information for time and eternity found in the Bible. Scripture says we were created for God, that our sins have driven a wedge between us and God, but that God sent His Son to take our sins upon Himself in order to restore our relationship with Him.
So, it makes sense that a God who has invested so much into us would also have endowed us with the prewiring needed to see letters. That way each can learn to read, take up the Bible, and discover the way back to Him.
‘Humans still evolving, claim scientists, according to Flinders University News and SciTech Daily 8 October 2020, BBC Science Focus and Science Alert 9 October 2020, Interesting Engineering 11 October 2020, and Journal of Anatomy published online 10 September 2020 doi:10.1111/joa.13224.
Researchers at Flinders University and University of Adelaide have found an increase in the number of adults who have an artery named the median artery in their forearms. This artery is formed during embryonic development and does a very important task in supplying the growing forearm and hand. But in most people it disappears as the two main arteries of forearm, the radial and ulnar arteries, develop and take over.
The research team found median arteries were present in 26 of the 78 forearms of adult bodies donated to the medical college in 2015 and 2016. Most of the bodies were from people born in the first half of the 20th century. The researchers checked older records and found that only 10% of people born in the 1880s had a median artery.
According to Teghan Lucas of Flinders University, “This increase could have resulted from mutations of genes involved in median artery development or health problems in mothers during pregnancy, or both actually. If this trend continues, a majority of people will have a median artery of the forearm by 2100.”
Maciej Henneberg, a professor of medicine at Adelaide University and member of the Institute of Evolutionary Medicine at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, commented: “This is micro evolution in modern humans and the median artery is a perfect example of how we’re still evolving because people born more recently have a higher prevalence of this artery when compared to humans from previous generations.”
Editorial Comment: In spite of the BBC’s claim that “Humans are evolving an extra artery in the arm” no extra artery is evolving. All humans possess a median artery in their early development, so no new structure has evolved.
In case you are thinking that having three arteries in the forearm would be an evolutionary gain, it isn’t. There is no benefit from having a median artery when you have two other fully functional arteries, and for some people it is associated with carpal tunnel syndrome – a painful condition of the hand.
They only reason this study was reported so widely in general science news is because of the claim ‘humans are evolving’. If the statistics quoted in this study do represent a real change in the number of people retaining this artery into adulthood, then the explanations given by Tegan Lucas but not reported widely in the media are probably true, i.e. the cause is either loss of genetic control, or the effect of disease. Both of these are degeneration, not evolution! Such findings are another reminder that human beings, like all living things, are going downhill, not evolving upwards.’https://creationfactfile.com/6103/humans-still-evolving/
whatyareckon 