Rocket Science and Paleontology

I came across this article the other day - ostensibly about whether or not Neanderthals "interbred" with so-called "modern man".

To the undiscerning eye this is yet one more piece of reportage on an aspect of erudite scientific work. It is trustworthy, factual and reliable.

To the trained eye, this article in nothing more than a collection of conjectures, flights of fantasy, suppositions, unproven assumptions and personal opinions.

We all have presuppositions of course and I am no different. I presuppose that the universe was created by God not much more than 6,000 years ago, and that man was made in His image, quite distinct from all the other creatures on earth. The basis for my presuppositions is the authority of Scripture as the Word of God.

So I am conflicted and amused at the same time when I read this quote which is included in the article:

"Homo sapiens is completely different from any other hominid that ever existed — we process information about the world in a different way." -Ian Tattersall (a paleoanthropologist at the American Museum of Natural History in New York)

The first part of the statement I obviously agree with. I concur that man is different from all other creatures and only add that it is because he was made in the image of God.

What exactly the speaker of the quote means when he references "all other hominids" is unclear. The meaning most likely is intended to convey a catch-all category including humans, so-called "extinct human forms" and the great apes. The context here makes this likely because it is comparing the Neanderthals with modern man. For the record, there is no proof that there ARE "extinct human forms" - only variants of ape-like creatures of various kinds and dead humans of various shapes and sizes. The rest is conjecture - including all the interpretation of bits of bone and skull and the idiotic pictures and mock-ups of the progression of human evolution by arranging the skeletons of primates in an order convenient to scientism's own presuppositions.

But the rocket scientists that promulgate this amorphous changeling called evolution are now apparently able to tell from the bones of dead creatures the differences in the thinking patterns of those creatures, absent any first-hand observation or experimentation. They just skip that part and go on over to the bald assertion of that which has yet to be demonstrated.

It's amazing how fossilized bone yields information about the complex electrical patterns of long disintegrated brains isn't it? We can barely hazard a guess most of the time as to how and what people think in this present age when they are right there next to us. Yet scienctism purports to be able to ascertain how men (or "hominids") thought in the distant past. Give me a break!