Our Ancestors the Apes?

If you haven't already guessed, this article is going to be about the theory of evolution, or at least about particular aspects of it.

I enjoy watching informative, educational television, such as the Discovery channel and The Learning Channel. The subject of the "theory of evolution" comes up often on these types of networks and when it does, often the producers of certain shows, will comment on the theory as if it is an absolute, rather than a theory. In other words, rather than saying to the effect; "Proponents of evolution believe..." they will instead say to the effect; "During the evolutionary process, such and such took place..." Certainly these people and anyone else on planet earth has a right to believe anything they like in regard to the existence of all things but when even science itself still refers to something as a "theory", this is how it should be presented; as a theory and not as fact.

One subject I've seen often in regard to evolutionary theory is that of the ape species, being our ancestors and it is stated, as if this is a fact, rather than the belief of those who accept this aspect of the theory. Since this is done quit often, let me bring some balance and perspective to the subject, by posing a few common sense questions that are avoided when this subject is presented by them or possibly these questions have for some reason not entered their minds in regard to the subject. There is such a thing as wanting to believe in something so much, that you purposely avoid any legitimate opposing views about it, even when they are common sense ones that must be answered to bring more legitimacy to that belief or theory. Ridiculing legitimate questions in regard to the theory of evolution is a type of avoidance that should rather be welcomed if one truly believes the theory because it should only serve as opportunity to confirm it, if it has truly factual aspects to it.

On the subject of mankind having evolved from the ape species, there are such common sense questions that are every bit as important as the most complicated scientific ones and in fact without answering them, leave a great deal more to be desired when trying to move-on to the deeper aspects. It's kind of like trying to climb a ladder by stepping up from the bottom rung, all the way up to the top rung and skipping all of the ones in-between. That is an "accident" waiting to happen.

Let me start with these questions. Why if the apes are our ancestors are we, existing at the same time with them? How is it that the lower species we evolved from is still here and we can look directly at them, alive and well, in our time? To answer this by saying it is because the evolutionary process started all over again at some point, does not answer the question. The reason it doesn't answer the question is because you still have two different species, the pre-species or lower-species and new-species or advanced species, able to stare each other directly in the face, in the same, present time period. If the evolutionary process started over, you would have every small change that took place between the two species and not just have the two distinct species.

Let me put it another way. Evolution proposes millions of years for a species to evolve into a new advanced one. If this were the case, you would have a great number of in-betweens during those millions of years not just one huge jump of apes-to-men. To say that evolution simply dropped some of the in-betweens, would actually be saying in-essence that through "selectivity", evolution dropped all of the other ape-man creatures and only continued the two distinct species we have now. When I say apes and men, I'm of course referring to all of the apes, which are a variety of monkeys, chimps, orangutans and gorillas and there are a variety of races of men as well. There are, no part-man, part-ape creatures among them, they are all distinctly apes or distinctly men. They used to claim there was a missing link but one missing link is a huge understatement because you don't get just one half-man, half-ape creature between the two species, when it took millions of years for one to evolve into the other. There would be more like many dozens or hundreds of in-betweens. For example, there had to be roughly, a 90% ape and 10% man at some point, then a 80% ape and 20% man etc.... Evolutionists have attempted to provide charts with drawings of such in-between species calling the different stages of ape-men, by names such as "piltdown man", "dawson's man" etc... but these are what they inject into the theory through imagination because even a dozen different stages would fall very short of representing 100s of millions of years of proposed evolution of apes to men.

If one does a search about some of these proposed stages, for example in regard to "piltdown man" (claimed discovery of 1912), you will discover, that it was a fraud/hoax (exposed in 1953) perpetrated by men wanting to legitimize the theory of evolution. This is not my opinion or that of religious people, it is a fact you can find on a large number of resources, including wikipedia and many others.

These questions have not and never will be answered through the theory of evolution because they are simply too complicated for an impersonal force some call "evolution" to have accomplished. The creativity, selectivity and design some attribute to evolution, is astounding because it simply could not have been an impersonal, non-designing, non-reasoning force, to have been able to accomplish all of this. There was obvious reasoning behind all of it ("reason"-ing/purpose) and design if you will and yet those who choose to believe the theory actually become offended when this is pointed out. You simply cannot talk about "selectivity", "advancing species", "adaptation" etc... and logically or even sanely turn right around and say "but there is no intelligent design". Isn't this an absolutely huge contradiction in terms (misnomer)?

What would be the purpose in apes anyway, some might ask? You could ask the same question of any animal but the obvious reasons are because they bring beauty, balance in nature and yes, even entertainment and pleasure for mankind. Have you noticed there are absolutely magnificent looking animals that simply put us in awe of their beauty? You'll never see an animal stop and bask in the beauty of another animal or creature. You'll never hear an ape stop and say "look at that beautiful peacock". You'll also never see a dog or a cow admiring the stripes on a zebra or the magnificent colors on an exotic fish. You will see humans doing this however and we can enjoy the acrobatics of dolphins flipping through the air and the humor of apes, who do indeed have arms, hands and facial features that somewhat remind us of ourselves. Monkeys can be flat-out cute and can make for some fun pets, just like dogs, cats and parrots can and would seem to be one of their many obvious purposes; for the pleasure of God and for the pleasure of man.

In a 1997 poll conducted by the "Nature" Science Journal, 40% of US Scientists said they believe in God not only as creator but one whom men can pray to and receive answers from. The "National Geographic News" stated in commenting on this poll, that the number would have likely been higher, had the question simply been in regard to God's existence and not posed/presented in a religious fashion. When you look at Americans in general, the numbers are even more impressive. A 2004 Fox News Poll showed that "92%" of Americans believe in God, 85% believe in Heaven, 82% believe in miracles and 71% believe in a literal devil/Satan. If those who believe in an impersonal evolution, thought this theory was widely accepted, they are mistaken. Those who believe in evolution and no design by a creator are a minority but despite this fact this same minority has successfully accomplished the removal of creationism from school science teaching and sometimes even from programs on television, in attempt to portray it as widely accepted, when it is not. Numerous polls, going back many years, have repeatedly proven this not to be the case. Those who believe in an evolutionary existence for all things, with no creative design involved, are in fact a minority in the most highly industrialized nation in the world.