I have heard and read from many folks who subscribe to evolutionism, that human speech and communication evolved from the grunts, howls, squeaks and groans of animals. Part of the proof they cite is our ability to communicate with animals today. But did human speech actually evolve from pet sounds? (queue The Beach Boys)…
Human speech is entirely different from the sounds that animals make and the way we communicate as humans with each other is vastly different than the way we communicate with animals, as to be obvious to anybody. Only human speech alone is able to portray thoughts and ideas–and is able to do so over great distances. Animals do not communicate in this way.
In fact, we alone have an entire area of our brain found in the left hemisphere in most people, called Broca’s Convolution, which is the motor speech center of our brain located in the inferior frontal gyrus of the cerebrum. According to evolutionism, humans and apes both evolved from an ape-like ancestor, yet neither apes, monkeys or any other animal for that matter have this section of the brain. If we both evolved from an ape-like ancestor, the question is, why not? Why do humans alone possess this speech center?
To counter this, many evolutionists compare human speech and communication to apes who have been taught sign language as a way to demonstrate the intelligence of animals in the speech department and the kinship between human and animal communication.
However, the comparison is not fitting for the following reasons. Apes who are taught to sign are not communicating “speech” but rather have learned a conditioned response. In other words, “You make this sign; I give you cookie.” It probably took someone thousands and thousands of hours and half a million cookies to get the ape to give the correct sign response. That is not speech or even communication in the technical sense. And when that ape dies, all of that information and ability is dying with it. It will not pass along that information to it’s young. Animals do not pass along accumulated knowledge the way humans do. Humans build schools and libraries to pass along information to the next generation. Animals will never communicate in this human-like fashion.
Not to mention the fact, that, as is the case for all aspects of evolutionism, the idea that grunts evolved into human speech is not substantiated by science and has never been observed.
The idea that human speech evolved from the sounds and noises of animals is a position not only impossible from a biological perspective, it is a position that does not comport with Scripture. Therefore, I disagree with it strongly.
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. (Genesis 2:23)
This piece is several weeks old now, however, being a space exploration and Curiosity Rover enthusiast, I could not resist posting it–even with a fine layer of dust.
I always love when I see pastors posting anti-Christian memes. What on earth are you doing in the pulpit if you don’t love the Lord and believe his word, the Bible?
Such is the case with this someecard above. If I had to take a guess, someone was attempting to set a record of how many incorrect or misunderstood notions could be crammed into a single sentence.
1) “Dear Religion” / “Your Pal Science”
Misconception #1 – There is a conflict between The Bible and Science
While evolutionism is polar opposite to the Bible in every regard, there is no conflict between the Bible and Science.
2) “While you were debating what chicken sandiwches were okay to eat”
Misconception #2 – Christians caused the Chick-fil-A controversy
It was the humanist who decided what chicken sandwiches not to eat when they boycotted Chick-fil-A after being shocked that a Christian Business owner who closes his shop on Sunday’s to honor the Sabbath, believes in the Biblical definition of marriage when specifically asked about it in an interview.
3) “I just landed on Mars”
Misconception #3 – Christians are unscientific
Christians founded every single major Field of Science:
Since God is the necessary precondition for logic and reason, Curiosity Rover was designed and delivered according to the Christian worldview which can account for things like The Laws of Mathematics, The Laws of Logic, The Laws of Science, The Principal of Induction and the only grounding for reason and knowledge, ALL entirely absent from the humanist presupposition.
Apollo 11, Armstrong, Atlas Agena B, Cape Kennedy, Cooper, docking, EVA, Gemini, Grissom, JFK, Landing accuracy, launch vehicles, moon landing, NASA, orbiting, Parawing, President Johnson, President Kennedy, Project Gemini, Titan II, Wendt
In January of 1962, after the Mercury Program, NASA announced its latest project and foray into space—Project Gemini. Cleverly named after the Latin root for twins and based on the third constellation of the Zodiak and it’s twin stars Castor and Pollux, Gemini would serve to denote that the 10 manned Gemini flights would contain “twin” (two) astronauts. Overall, Project Gemini included 12 journey’s into space to develop certain spaceflight capabilities.
On April 8, 1964, the first of 12 launches made it off the ground from Cape Kennedy. Pictured below is the actual launch of Gemini I and Titan II, followed by the Project Gemini launch vehicles.
According to NASA, the objective goals of Project Gemini were well defined and mission critical to a future moon-landing which would eventually occur with Apollo 11. One of the objectives was to subject man and equipment to space flight for a minimum duration of two weeks.
Another goal was to perfect the rendezvous and docking of orbiting vehicles and to maneuver the docked combination by using the target vehicle’s propulsion system as depicted below.
Project Gemini also eyed perfecting methods of entering the atmosphere and landing at a pre-selected point on land. These goals were also met, with the exception of a land landing, which was cancelled in 1964. Prior to the cancellation however, many concepts were tried and tested including the parawing, also known as the Rogallo Wing seen below.
Below is a 1960 NASA-Langley film showing some early testing of the parawing concept.
Another mission objective was to demonstrate what is called “Extra-Vehicular Activity” (EVA for short), or space-“walks” outside the protection of the spacecraft, and to evaluate the astronauts’ ability to perform tasks there.
From my very earliest memories, I can remember stories about my Grandfather’s work on Project Gemini. I think just about every boy dreams of space travel and knowing that my Grandfather’s contributions made the Gemini launches a series of successes made me further fall in love with the dream of space exploration. Two of his many hats were as an Electrical and Chemical Engineer and had a keen gift for architecture and technical detail. My Grandfather received two Presidential Commendations from President Johnson for his work, particularly for Gemini I and Gemini II.
I can fondly remember visiting Kennedy Space Center as a child and seeing my Grandfather’s name on multiple bronze plaques next to what I now understand were replicas of the actual crafts that my Grandfather had helped build.
On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy delivered a speech called, “Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs,” before a joint session of Congress. In this speech, JFK stated that the United States should set as a goal the “landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth” by the end of the decade. I am proud to remember that Project Gemini was a necessary and integral link in that chain of events…as was my dear and brilliant Grandfather, Jack Zulumian.
Click on the image above in order to explore the mysteries of Mount Sharp on Mars. I could stare at this for hours.
“Transformism is a fairy tale for adults.” (Jean Rostand, French Biologist, Age Nouveau, February 1959, p. 12)
Q: WHY DON’T WE SEE EVOLUTION HAPPENING TODAY?
A: BECAUSE IT HAPPENS TOO SLOWLY.
Q: WHY DON’T WE SEE EVOLUTION IN THE FOSSIL RECORD?
A: BECAUSE IT HAPPENS TOO QUICKLY.
All over the internet, websites make the erroneous claim that stars are forming in space. These claims of star formations are often buttressed with photographs, like the one above, as furnished evidence.
The only problem is, while there are more than 70 sextillian stars out there–so many that each human could own 11 trillion of them, we have never witnessed a star being formed. That of course, is a problem for evolutionism because star births should at least equal star deaths, but alas, they do not.
I heard a Scientist once pontificate that if 20 stars blew up at the same time, they could create enough pressure and heat to create a new star.
Well, to begin with, that is entirely theoretical. We have never observed that happening.
Secondly, if you have to lose 20 to gain 1, how did we get them all?
Thirdly, Boyle’s Gas Law dictates that the elements will be driven apart under that pressure and extreme heat.
What we have witnessed, are spots getting brighter. But just because a spot is getting brighter does not mean a star is forming.
Can ANY photograph prove that a star is forming?
No, and here’s why:
A. A spot getting brighter could be a dust cloud is clearing revealing what is behind it (another star?)
B. A spot getting brighter could be a nova or supernova which always get brighter right before they explode
C. A spot getting brighter could be two stars are coming into conjunction with each other
D. A spot getting brighter could be many stars coming into conjunction with each other
Therefore, just because you see a spot getting brighter in space does not mean a star is being born, nor could a still photograph prove it.