By RAYMOND DE SOUZA, KM
Part 22
We tend to respect someone who may disagree with us on a scientific debate, as long as he is consistent with his arguments. As long as he accepts the natural, logical consequences of his beliefs, he deserves respect. But when someone disagrees with us but is not consistent, and contradicts himself, we naturally tend to have less respect for him in a debate, if any at all.
Take, for instance, the man who sincerely believes in evolution, that is, humans descend from different couples of inferior species, baboons, chimpanzees, or gorillas, whichever they prefer to descend from.
This is not reasonable. First of all, it lacks solid scientific evidence; secondly, it reduces mankind to a bunch of evolved apes, or brings apes up to the level of humans. In the previous article I pointed out that both options are unacceptable.
It is important to emphasize the reasons behind this affirmation: One, if men are just evolved animals, we do not have a spiritual soul. Therefore, we would be just cleverer animals, acting by instinct and holding no moral responsibility for our actions. Might makes right. Hitler would have been acting on his instinct of animal superiority over the other animals he deemed inferior and unfit to live, such as Jews, Gypsies, and others. The abortion industry, ISIS, and any other monsters who prey on other species would be just evolved animals without a soul and moral responsibility.
Two, if apes are of the same kind of animals like us, then they would have all human rights and duties which men have, including being elected to Congress and paying taxes.
But seriously, Charles Darwin, who reduced men to the level of evolved beasts, at some point in time was consistent with his pre-Nazi beliefs and drew the serious consequences — consequences which depressed him no end. He said that he had the “horrid doubt” that always arose in his mind: Do the convictions of men’s mind, having developed from the “mind” of lower animals, have any value at all? Are they trustworthy? (Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, D. Appleton and Co., New York, 1898, volume I, p. 316, cf. p. 313).
In plain English, if we are nothing but improved beasts, we are not sure of any of our convictions, not sure of our responsibility for our actions, not sure of anything true! If the ideas in our mind are just secretions of a developed animal brain, what is true and what is false? Is there any truth at all in the theory of evolution itself? Or is it just a secretion of an evolved beastly brain?
Consequently, good and evil would not be realities, but only random choices made by the instinct-ruled “mind” of an evolved beast. No wonder Nazism and Communism held to evolution.
But let us walk an extra mile and suppose that God did infuse certain powers in the animal nature of some living creature to make it evolve — even though there is not definite scientific proof of it — and infused a spiritual soul into it. Would that be evolution from that previous creature to man? No, it is not. Even if God grabbed a couple of chimpanzees from a tree and infused spiritual souls in them, it would be creation — not evolution. The intellectual soul of a man could never evolve by itself from a non-intellectual animal brain; anyone can see that. Thoughts are not secretions.
The Catholic Church affirms that God used pre-existing matter (no dogmatic definition about what it was) and made man. If there was an intelligent designer who added the intellectual souls, it was creation — not evolution.
But even here the theory does not hold water. Even if God had done that, the chromosomes of the new being would have remained the chromosomes of the previous animal. If God changed the chromosomes, it was, once again, creation, and not evolution. Moreover, since evolutionists claim that the development of the human species would have taken thousands of years, then we should be able to find thousands upon thousands of fossil records, showing the many stages of the evolutionary process!
Say, for instance, at a point in time the hands are slightly more humanoid; later on, the backbone would be a little straighter; then the forehead less flat and more humanoid; then the feet less hand-like and more foot-like, and so on and so forth. There ought to be millions and millions of fossil records showing the slow changes between the ape and the man over thousands of years — but they don’t exist!
We find plenty of skeletons of apes and plenty of skeletons of men, but of nobody else in between.
Everyone has heard about the “missing link.” It was Darwinism that gave rise to the search for the famous “missing link.” Scientists and pseudo-scientists have spent a great many years of their lives, their savings, and great donations of wealthy foundations to find the “missing link” between the ape and the man. They have found all sorts of fossil bones of all sorts of creatures, trying to find the “missing link.” But unfortunately for them, the famous missing link is still missing! Not a single one has ever been found.
The fossil record shows abysmal gaps and discontinuities between any animal fossils and man. The attempts to find links between man and other primates have failed. Two of the best-known “discoveries” promoted as “evidence” of man’s evolution were later exposed as frauds: the famous “Piltdown man” of 1912-1915, and “Nebraska man” of 1922.
Piltdown man was cited in books and articles as clear evidence of man’s descent from apes. Which “evidence” was presented? Two old bones: the skull of a modern man, and a jaw having an ape-like shape. But it was enough to make evolutionists rejoice. They celebrated with song and dance, but their joy was short-lived: A close scrutiny revealed that the teeth had been filed down to make them look like human teeth (a very poor fraud job, I’d say. They could surely do better than that!).
Lie, lie, lie — something always sticks, said Voltaire.
Next article: More evolutionist frauds, lies and bluffs.
+ + +
(Raymond de Souza is an EWTN program host; regional coordinator for Portuguese-speaking countries for Human Life International [HLI]; president of the Sacred Heart Institute, and a member of the Sovereign, Military, and Hospitaller Order of the Knights of Malta. His website is: www.RaymonddeSouza.com.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress