This portrayal of the roots of humanity is typical of evolutionist scientific conclusions; 300,000 year old bones are worthy of scientific analysis, but, with open perspectives; not closed (“Earliest fossil evidence of Homo sapiens found in Morocco,” The Herald, June 7).
It is full of speculative assumptions, fuzzy words and a pandering to the adherents of an ancient earth.
“They are not just like us” which is probably correct, but to conclude that “basically the face you could meet on the train in New York” is an extrapolation not based upon fact. That is the kind of statement artists love to make when depicting dinosaurs but in another form of expression not based upon observable facts.
Scientists, when they really don’t know often publish their conclusions in fuzzy words or phrases such as “the Moroccan fossils suggest,” not what one would call a statement based upon good scientific investigative procedures and not stated as fact.
“Homo sapiens may…” the use of the permissive form here does not solidify fact nor does it indicate certainty.
What is clear is that there is good science that supports a young earth. There is a proven historical written record of the creation of not only all of the environment, but also of a world wide mega flood denied by most evolutionists in the face of geological facts of a young earth, current rubble drift studies, catastrophism and archaeological discoveries of rapidly buried thousands of of bones in massive bone beds. The lists go on and on.” Different populations may have exchanged beneficial genetic mutations.” Not a factual statement here either. In fact, genetic mutations tend to eliminate traits rather than improve them.
Samuel Bess
Stanwood
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
