Anti-Evolution
by Doug Yurchey
Copyright by Doug Yurchey.
All Rights Reserved.
Presented with permission of the author.
Problem with
Creationism
Problem with
Primates | Problem with the
Stone Age | Problem with
Darwinism
World-Mysteries.com
presents first chapter (all about the errs of Creationism) and 3 sections from the anti-EVOLUTION chapter from
a new book being written by Doug Yurchey.
by Doug Yurchey
‘It’s too simple. How could Life, the Universe and
Everything have been a simple process?’
How can Creationism be true? In the Dark Ages, not that long
ago, there was only one viewpoint; there was only one agenda.
The united Churches of various countries ruled supreme. They
were ‘God,’ exactly as those with too much power feel that they
are today. The Church was a solid, unchanging monolith. Today,
people are financially ruined; back then, they burned you at
the stake for any type of heresy. ‘They’ (authorities) had a
full range of public tortures to teach the masses a lesson.
This was the Holy Church. They took your money and if you were
not careful; they might confiscate everything you own (like the
I.R.S.).
This writer must ask a few questions to readers. What time
is it? What century is it? Creationism might work for those of
the pre-Renaissance. Creationism does not function well in the
days of the post-Renaissance. How can any philosophy not
include science? How can any view not incorporate some strands
of established, scientific truths? We do not have to swallow
classic Science or Darwin’s version of Evolution, but most real
facts clash with general Fundamentalism.
Churches may disregard certain disturbing facts, but would
their deity? What kind of God do Creationists have that ignores
universal facts? The Supreme God, by definition, has set the
universal stage and is aware of every scientific fact in town.
Then, anything TRUE is of God; God, that incomprehensible thing
that is the Ultimate Scientist? The God-force certainly does
not possess the ignorance of men who believed the Earth was
flat. Would not God condemn superstitious ignorance and
appreciate scientific wisdom? By this logic, if we really want
to get closer to religious truths (and God)…then, we should not
follow a ‘spiritual’ way of life…but, a ‘scientific’ path.
What is wrong with a union of Science and Religion? Answers
do not reside exclusively in one camp or the other. There
exists only ONE truth and it must stand in-between Evolution
and Creationism. Theological truths are not black or white.
Eastern philosophies (such as metaphysics, reincarnation, etc.)
are middle-truths since they are opposed by Church and State.
The point is to not side or place all of your faith in one
(Western) extreme or the other. A middle-of-the-road attitude
tends to be a correct code. Creationism is a mad, blindfolded
monster from the Dark Ages. Any modern person can slay
Creationism; even a child.
Why would we want beliefs anywhere near our great, great,
great, great, great, great grandfather’s views? Remember what
time it is. Are we not modern men and women? Remember to keep
your eyes and mind open. Too many people have died because they
believed they knew the truth and THE CHURCH KILLED THEM!
Giordana Bruno was an Italian philosopher; born in 1548, not
far from Mount Vesuvius. His controversial work included a
belief that the universe was infinite and the Earth orbited the
sun. Bruno became a Dominican priest. He coined the phrase,
‘libertes philosophica,’ which means the freedom to think/dream
and make philosophy. Chief theologians, at the time, and the
pope’s Inquisition convicted the heretic. He was imprisoned for
eight years and then taken to the palace of the Grand
Inquisitor in February, 1600. After given numerous
opportunities to recant in order to save his life, Bruno
refused and was burned at the stake.
‘…He suffered a cruel death and achieved a unique
martyr's fame. He has become the Church's most difficult
alibi. She can explain away the case of Galileo with suave
condescension. Bruno sticks in her throat. He is one martyr
whose name should lead all the rest. He was not a mere
religious sectarian who was caught up in the psychology of
some mob hysteria. He was a sensitive and imaginative poet,
fired with the enthusiasm of a larger vision of a larger
universe...and he fell into the error of heretical belief.
For this poet’s vision, he was kept in a dark dungeon for
years and then taken out to a blazing marketplace and roasted
to death by fire! It is an incredible story. The Church will
never outlive him.’
Bruno suffered a terrible demise that Copernicus, Galileo
and Martin Luther did not have to experience. A ‘Giordana
Bruno’ reference has to do with where the Church is coming
from; its godforsaken, cruel history. How many elderly were
deemed witches or warlocks and ignited on fire by the Churches?
Even Jesus Christ was persecuted and killed for philosophic
clashes with Sanhedrin. Isn’t it time we question the
Church’s right-winged Fundamentalism and each aspect of its
principles? Could the Church survive against self-Inquisition
and righteous judgment? (What freedom to be able to print
new views without rocks being thrown!).
Given that prelude…shouldn’t we QUESTION the basic,
fundamental doctrines of Creationism? Creationism is too simple
of a philosophy. It is traditional dogma and passed on opinions
from a dim time period. How could Life, the Universe and
Everything have been a simple process? Where is some science?
Shouldn’t complex sciences have been involved? Where is even a
glimmering ghost of science in Fundamentalism? The quick
formation of Earth by God, Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were
naively accepted as fact by most people before the 20th
Century. A modern view should be one that reexamines archaic
creeds with future eyes. We should expect the unexpected
and prepare to toss old-fashioned conventions in the Recycle
Bin.
Author’s note: This writer is not an atheist. But, I sure
want a true belief-system above the level of a witchdoctor…or
more advanced than the 4th Century.
Consider how long the war has been waged between Church and
State, Religion and Science or Creationism and Evolution. We
can read anti-Creationism information exactly as we can read
anti-Evolution information. One side attacks the other as if
their viewpoint is the right one and there are, of course, only
two choices. In this text, religion or fundamental Creationism
will not be criticized because of an Evolutionary point of
view. In this text, Darwin Evolution and ‘primates’ will not be
criticized from a Creationist point of view. BOTH Science and
Church cannot be correct on the single question of our genesis.
We will be in search of one harmonious conclusion that explains
the human mystique.
One definition of ‘Creationism’ is purely a rejection of
Darwinism. Because there are those that oppose Darwin and
‘Natural Selection,’ does not make them Creationists.
‘God did it,’ should not be a sufficient answer to our
unknown origins and the mysteries of the universe. We should
demand more as members of a modern age.
Creationists presuppose that the Supreme God created the
Earth and the rest of the Universe, the ‘heavens and the
earth.’ Maybe God was not responsible? Possibly, other life
forms built the cosmos. Is GOD as the ‘Builder of All’ too damn
easy of a concept to be true? How does the farthest extent of
GOD fit so smoothly into our infinitesimally small brain? The
feat is impossible.
Creationists believe that our planet is a matter of
thousands of years old and not billions as is the scientific
belief. Known, biological life on the planet is probably tens
of thousands of years old. The age of Earth is a different
story. Our Earth, old ‘terra firma,’ has experienced a vast
scope of time. Who says our ancestors were the planet’s first
kingdom? Lemuria or Mu, the starting-empire of the Asian Race,
precedes the Indian civilizations of Atlantis and was centered
in the Pacific Ocean. We can extrapolate other, possibly alien
empires living and dying out long before the Lemurians. Slight
traces of intelligent societies, hundreds of thousands of years
ago, have been ignored or given no credibility by scientists.
Unfathomable civilizations could have come and gone on terra a
million years ago when conditions were utterly different than
what Earth is like today.
A literal few thousand years from the beginning of the Earth
to its final form does not sound plausible, naturally. But, if
planet-builders (Slartybartfast in ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide…’) were
capable of manufacturing entire worlds, then creatures would be
churning planets out of gigantic factories in space. Whatever
means of planetary integration or materialization, the birth of
Earth and other worlds might not be natural/slow-moving events.
Planetoids may have been quickly built, SYNTHETIC
constructions. Venus and our Moon break most laws of physics
and reason. Yet, enigmatic Venus and Luna continue as
unbelievable oddities in the heavens. Study photos of Saturn’s
moon Iapetus if students want to observe a cosmic body that is
ARTIFICIAL. We can visually see its unnaturalness. Very
close examination shows irregular, but unnatural
architecture!
The possibility exists that planets could have been erected
in thousands of years or LESS, but not by the fire and
brimstone God of the Christians. Advanced humans, aliens or any
number of high-tech angels might be in charge of manufacturing
planets. Have the gods seeded a human-culture on Earth? Do
aliens own the planet? Is Earth their property? Are we? Strange
at it sounds; there are aspects of fundamental Creationism that
could have its true points. If planets and moons are
‘artificial’ constructions, then their fabrication into
existence did not require billions of years as naturalists
contend.
Naturalists may be ‘barking up the wrong tree’ when they
erroneously view an unnatural world and only see a lifeless
universe. Maybe the infinite universe is filled with more than
gas, dust and debris? Maybe nature and the universe are alive?
Life could be everywhere. What if every molecule of nature,
from atoms to cosmic bodies, is unnatural and has been
synthetically produced? What if we only presume nature comes
naturally?
Religious Fundamentalists may be correct when they say we
began in the Garden of Eden. Did Atlantean geneticists clone
people in a garden called Eden? Were Adam and Eve clones that
emerged out of a lab? What if Biblical Creation was a
simplified story that is ‘basically’ true? How do you inform
yesterday’s distant descendants of ancient history? How could
future generations, whose technology had plummeted to the Dark
Ages, understand anything of their amazing heritage? Prehistory
was similar to a sci-fi epic that would interest the likes of
George Lucas. In fact, we may have already seen prehistory
(generally) portrayed on the big screen in ‘Attack of the
Clones.’
If future generations of ancient astronauts lost their
high-tech and fell upon barbaric times, their primitive
descendants could not conceive the phenomenal story of the
first/great Indian Societies. The complex world of yesterday
was gone. Now, there only remain savage barbarians of the Dark
Ages. Historic stories, records, myths, legends and memories
from long ago had to be simplified for a much simpler age of
people. Idyllic EDEN might be a true report of a far, buried
memory. Our beginning was a Paradise. The ‘Garden of Eden,’ the
‘forbidden fruit,’ the ‘serpent’…could be watered-down ways of
telling ancient tales of history to new, naive generations.
Were the ‘forbidden fruits’ highly destructive weapons, the
fruits of knowledge? Was it a Tree of Knowledge (technology)
that could be used for good or evil purposes? Did the long
echoes of time change a complex Homer’s Odyssey into a simple,
children’s story? We have to stop being childish. We have to
start thinking for ourselves and finding our own answers. We
have to stop being sheep.
Biblical Eden parallels legendary Atlantis. Consider
these two legends. Plato wrote of Atlantis, our
mother-civilization. Psychic, Edgar Cayce confirmed Atlantis as
the root race that later split into the Pre-Egyptians and
Pre-Incas. Both stories were the beginning genesis for the
human race. Both stories of a technical utopia and garden
paradise similarly coincide. Atlantis and Eden could be
reflections of the same story or same historic events; one
record of real happenings and one told to simpler generations
to come. Both legends suffered a disastrous end as humanity had
to depart in disgrace.
Author’s note: How can there truly be any separation
between Church and State? The idea of a ‘separation’ is
fallacy, an illusion, a convenient mask to what is really going
on in the world. Secret, governing bodies are a two-headed
snake; Church and State.
The problem with Creationism is not that it is wrong. (As
this writer’s tongue gags-in- mouth), ‘In many cases,
Creationism is correct and has it right. The problem is a
simple, easy, uncomplicated, basic, almost superstitious
viewpoint of traditional Fundamentalism does incredible
damage.’ Even if religious Creationism has valid points, to
dilute the fantastic occurrences of prehistory into a pale
fable for the masses (fraught with misconceptions) causes
immeasurable harm. It has created a billion simpletons, the
religious-right that could not be more wrong.
‘God is a concept by which we measure
our pain.’
-- John Lennon
Doug Yurchey can be contacted at dugko@surfside.net
THE PROBLEM WITH PRIMATES
Why are apes, chimps, monkeys and other tree-crawling
‘primates’ ALIVE today? If humans originated from apes,
wouldn’t anything that resembles anthropoids be only found in
the fossil record? We certainly should not be able to shake
hands with our very distant, primordial ancestors!
Why are humans in the same time period as our ‘living’
primates? That fact should not be…if we think carefully. The
better question is, ‘how could one group of ape have turned out
so damn handsome and sophisticated while the other group stayed
crouched, hairy beasties?’
Scientists/anthropologists (that simply want to counter
Creationism) point out the similarities between humans and
apes. Rather, we should be aware of the great gulf between the
two or the numerous DIFFERENCES among humans and apes.
Remember, we exist at the same moment in time with the families
of apes. What could have drastically changed one early group of
‘primates,’ while unaffecting the other in the same
environment? The SAME environment should have produced similar
humans, not generated vast differences between Monkey and Man!
Image Copyright by World-Mysteries.com
Any physical semblance between us and (alleged) ape ancestry
should have been stripped away a long, long time ago.
Darwinists or classic evolutionists are not correct. If they
were right, gorillas/baboons/orangutans and the rest of the ape
varieties would not be living creatures today. They would be
long dead and long gone. The only natural images of apes should
be exclusively found in prehistoric, fossil records. The fact
that monkeys are with us presently and we see them eat bananas
is evidence that Darwinism makes little sense.
Logic tells us that the idea of ape-origination is surreal
and irrational. No matter how often a genesis from
‘cave-people’ is drummed into our consciousness, the assumption
remains untrue and unproven. Repeating an error does not
increase its validity.
There are two very important FACTS that students should
realize. The following are two points the educators will ‘sweep
under the rug.’ The points make no conventional sense and
cannot be traditionally explained. Therefore, the Darwinists go
around these particular facts and pretend they do not exist.
Archeologists and anthropologists would rather these treasures
not be unearthed. The next points you will read cannot be found
or examined in your anthropology books. They continue to be
buried. They will also not appear in mainstream documentaries
on such subjects…
One: Various types of
proto-human forms such as Australopithecus, Cro-Magnon,
Neanderthal, Homo erectus, etc…all existed at the SAME time
period and have been found to exist at the same archeological
level!
Two: Cro-Magnon’s cranial
capacity is considerably LARGER than modern humans! It is
physical evidence that Cro-Mags were smarter than us today!
Let us investigate point number one. Darwin Evolution is
based on the concept of very slow change over long epochs of
time. Like not seeing the movements of hands on a clock, we
could barely perceive how generations altered in their physical
forms. Human progression or human-change, (always moving
forward) according to evolutionists, did not happen quickly.
The Darwin Theory is centered on the idea that one proto-human
form dominated the planet for ages and was later (slowly)
replaced by an evolving and superior form of primate.
‘Survival of the fittest’ is the belief system. The stronger
type of prehistoric human wiped out the inferior primates that
previously ruled the Earth. Standing upright, the use of simple
tools even as weapons, adaptation were all utilized so that the
‘next’ or future-form dominated the planet. Evolutionary
processes required ages, many millennia and unfathomable
amounts of TIME…according to the theory. Nothing in human
history happened quickly or suddenly to Charles Darwin.
As point one reveals, the secret truth is that all of the
above mentioned (alleged) primates have been discovered to live
at the same time period. Different primates, thought to have
each dominated for eons, were found to co-exist. People of
‘science’ cannot harmonize the paradox. The truth means their
precious Evolution as a creation-theory is out-dated, very
ignorant and the concept of ‘primates’ is absolutely WRONG!
The fact that varieties of so-called ‘primates’ shared the
planet; were found on the same level of rock strata and same
time period means we need to rethink our view of human history.
Let us investigate point number two. Brain size determines
intelligence. By measuring the capacity or volume of space
(size) of the brain cavity, we can determine the intelligence
of the species. Dolphins have huge, complex brains and are
incredibly intelligent. The brain size of these beautiful
mammals rivals the size of modern humans. Gorillas and
orangutans have modest-sized brain cavities and are reasonably
intelligent. Unintelligent creatures have small brains; it is
as simple as that.
Now, see if you can fit the idea that the brain size of
Cro-Magnons is LARGER than modern humans into traditional
history. You cannot do it. The idea that one group of supposed
primates were BRAINIACS and were actually smarter, more
sophisticated, than people of the 21st Century…is unsettling.
The large-brained Cro-Mags make no sense if what we are taught
is true. What we are taught is not true and we must question
everything that we are force-fed. Neanderthal, Australopithecus
and other ‘simpler’ types of humans were not large-brained.
Consider that Edgar Cayce, in his book on Atlantis, wrote that
the ‘Cro-Magnons were Atlantean man.’ The faithful, talented
psychic did not suggest that the other forms were Atlanteans,
only the Cro-Magnons.
What is the significance of large-brained Cro-Magnons? It
means that a super-civilization, a utopia, a technical Eden
really happened. We needed other areas of the brain (unused
today) to handle and deal with a Super Society. To build
titanic wonders in impossible places; to move mountains; to
construct pyramids; to master space travel, cloning and draw
vast amounts of electricity out of nature required
super-brains. If the New Genesis concept is valid, these
ancient supermen and superwomen had to have used idle/dormant
portions of our modern brains. Imagine a psychic-society
without the need to read or write; we would know and be able to
telepathically communicate over long distances. Imagine a
smoothly-running paradise of brainiacs.
Now, imagine worldwide disasters happening to your great
empire of Atlantis over time. High-tech ages suddenly collapsed
and came to total standstills, such as the Egyptian/Incan and
Mayan empires. On the order of how a global nuclear war would
ravage today’s civilization. Our modern world could be
demolished back into the Dark Ages; back into the caves. If
human history had to endure cycles of floods, ancient nukes,
wars and possible ‘electric’ disasters (destruction of the
World Grid?)…you and your children might be thrown into a
barbaric age. Over much time of having to adapt to a primitive
environment, simply to survive, we would lose our natural
mental abilities. Our super-brains would actually atrophy and
SHRINK because of non-usage over time; because our Super
Society blew up in our face and was no more!
We are humans and the few survivors lived in caves long ago.
We did not begin in caves; rather we were forced to retreat to
caves for survival. We kept producing generations of offspring,
but our fantastic Metropolis was gone and so were our
telepathic/telekinetic capabilities. The PHYSICAL fact of
‘large-brained’ Cro-Magnons supports the idea that we were once
gods, but have long lost such high stature.
One more time, evolutionary scientists are not a little
wrong; they are very wrong. We have been trained to believe
that early forms of proto-human had ‘sloped foreheads.’
Anthropologists do damage by teaching that all primates had
caved-in, sloped foreheads and were poor savages with small
brains. One particular group of cave-people had large, huge,
‘bulbous’ foreheads and they were the Cro-Mags. Modern men and
women are not at the top of the evolutionary chart when it
comes to brain size. We stand (maybe as inferior apes) below
the level of the Cro-Magnons’ brain size.
It is an error to refer or to picture Cro-Magnons as
primitive cave-people in any way. Imagine them as space
travelers, ancient astronauts, builders of pyramids or gods in
the ‘flying chariots.’ Barbarous times were thrust upon them
because their great empire was destroyed, as we will outline in
this text. If nukes went off today, we would be thrust into
similar dire conditions. The survivors would be forced into
primitiveness because their mega-technological world got out of
control and imploded!
Email Doug Yurchey at:
dugko@surfside.net
THE PROBLEM WITH THE STONE AGE
We hear the words ‘Stone Age’ and think of primitive cavemen
and dinosaurs. We do not think titanic, impossible
structures of the ancient world that our most powerful
machinery cannot duplicate! We have been virtually and
subtly ‘brainwashed’ with the view of primitive primates.
(Possibly, educators feel ‘superior’ and egos assume that they
are the crown of Creation).
The big question is, ‘Fifty thousand years ago, were we
climbing down from the trees and first learning to use simple
tools?’ ‘Or, were we flying through space, colonizing; building
pyramid-power stations and cloning ourselves?’
The true answer to the above question is ‘B,’ flying through
space colonizing and cloning. But, most people ‘buy’ the theory
of primitive cave-people for the same reason they buy products.
‘Evolution and prehistoric cavemen’ are what is advertised.
People feel safe and comfortable with the mainstream.
Vast numbers of tourists visit Giza, Stonehenge, Easter
Island, Teotihuacan and many other STONE constructions of
prehistory. Tour guides tell the visitors, ‘look how remarkable
early Man was; they could accomplish so much without the use of
modern technology.’ When we examine such statements, an
unmistakable contradiction should be realized.
Possibly, the answer to ancient mysteries is that our
ancestors possessed overwhelming technologies even more
advanced than the present? When we color the Pre-Incans and
Pre-Egyptians with a brush of ‘barbarism,’ we only display our
own ignorance. We should give our ancestors much more credit.
Can we stop insulting the Pre-Incans and Pre-Egyptians by
finally understanding that they were better than us?
How were the massive megaliths of the Old World cut and
transported? Tour guides and brochures will attempt to convince
you. They will provide ‘reasonable,’ fundamental techniques as
solutions to the puzzle. Ramps, rollers, levers, pulleys,
ropes, slaves and animals should do it. Rarely will mysteries
be left as mysteries. Authorities will never report, ‘We do not
know.’ Instead, ‘they’ will fill-in enigmas with complete
misinterpretations and pure mistakes that are no better than
the Flat-Earth Theory.
A theory including ‘super-lasers and anti-gravity’ provides
reasonable answers as to how the huge monoliths were shaped and
moved when you consider the physics (weights) involved.
Traditional academicians would never accept such notions as
modern or above-modern technology existing so long ago.
One example of a typical misunderstanding was demonstrated
in a particular documentary concerning the Incas. Researchers
excavated the area around enormous, 100-ton, stone blocks that
comprise the unbelievable fortresses high in the Andes.
Thin-air sites such as Ollyantambo and Sacsayhuaman were
studied. But, the problem was that the scientists foolishly
believed that the ground near the giant-rock fortresses would
reveal clues about the original builders. Yes, a few simple
tools and bowls were found. Scant evidence of not-so-advanced
Indians was discovered.
A few relics of simple tribes in the shadows of mountainous
sites containing building blocks weighing at least 100-tons
each…have little to do with the original builders of
Ollyantambo or Sacsayhuaman. The basic discoveries could very
easily be recent while titanic bases of megaliths are more than
10,000 years old! One is certainly not connected to the other
since oceans of TIME probably separate the two. A few, meager
tribes may have endured the hostile environment of the ‘high
plain’ Altiplano out of sheer inertia (reincarnation?).
Consider that STONE is the perfect material if the
architects want the structures to last ages and ages. After
many millennia of wear and tear, after much environmental
weathering and erosion, stone constructions will endure.
Sandstone, limestone and granite are basically permanent. How
long do our present-day buildings last? A hundred years? Not
really; castles have been around for more than a thousand
years. Castles are made of stone. Our ancestors built
structures that survived the ravages of time.
An intelligent (culturally-advanced) society builds in
stone, rather than in softer/less permanent materials. The most
important buildings of your civilization should be constructed
in rock to last the long course of time. You would desire that
the most essential facilities, such as those connected to
power/communications, endure and function. They need to be
maintained and stand up to Great Floods or nuclear threats.
Thick, stone walls provide the ideal atomic bomb shelters.
Stone was the perfect medium for the gods. Stone has CRYSTAL
(radio) properties and can hold an electrical charge. Stones
can be highly electrified; stones can be highly magnetized.
Standing stones can carry an EM signal and pass on the
information/power to the next stone in a grid of standing
stones (induction). Stone was the perfect material for
gargantuan statues that only appear as idols to honor pagan
gods. The rock architecture and pyramids’ true purpose had to
do with functioning as UTILITY POLES!
Before we view the Stone Age as a ‘primitive’ period, we
have to think again. Students should realize that the first
obelisks seemed to be built for the gods. The Stone of the
South in Baalbek, Lebanon weighs more than 5000 tons. Some
estimates have placed this one giant carving at 8000 tons! How
much did the original rock weigh before it was carved,
15-20,000 TONS? The sculpted (sliced) weight is on a
scale that our technology will not master for hundreds of
years! The ancient obelisk rests on its side and is
barely noticed to taper to a smaller width. Stone of the South
looks more like the large foundation of a colossal Greek
monument, than an obelisk.
Examine the Valley of the Kings at Luxor, Egypt or the
ceiling carvings at Abydos. Investigate the detailed,
hieroglyphic reliefs amazingly carved into stone by Egyptians
and also by the Mayas on the other side of the ocean. Study
remarkable ‘stele’ (Indian standing stones) and the texture of
these huge, heavy totems. The deep etchings into dense material
were created with the precision of fine, diamond drills
Also observe numerous ‘island’ cities of the Maya, Olmec and
Toltec Indians in the dense jungles of Central America. The
stonework is obviously on a level far above what can be built
presently. Note the placement of stele, such as in the
courtyards of Copan. It is not difficult to imagine that the
squared, ornate totems operated (literally) as utility poles.
They were placed in similar locations that resemble where we
place our (wired) power poles today. See if you can look upon
Mayan, stone plazas, pyramids, cities and perceive them not as
mere ‘ceremonial centers’…but as wireless, Electro-Magnetic
powerhouses. A few of the stone wonders, surrounded by intense
vegetation, have row upon row of squared-off steles. These
stunning rock pillars are aligned with laser-perfect precision!
Lasers were probably used in their making and placement.
Visiting tourists walk between rows of perfectly-straight,
little towers of stone. Stele monoliths may have once
oscillated carrying huge amounts of electricity. Mayan
buildings, with many rows of stele, could have served as
generating and distributing POWER STATIONS.
The problem with the age of stonecutters is that we have
been reinforced to believe these early Indians were savages
that practiced human-sacrifices and cannibalism. Implausible,
stone altars in the so-called ‘ceremonial centers’ are thought
to be where ‘ritual’ killings occurred. Traditional
archeologists point out where they believe blood poured down
stone troughs in the natives’ tribute to pagan gods. We only
ASSUME this view; reality is a matter of relative perceptions.
If researchers had the proper view, that Mayan and Incan
civilizations were high-tech races, then our American ancestors
would no longer be savages. Today’s scientists completely
misinterpret the ancient ‘flying’ Indians because they do not
understand the power system that fueled their society. How can
we believe that the pyramid-manufacturers were anything less
than an elegant race of super astronomers and super scientists?
‘Human-sacrifices’ are a big misconception.
Indian savagery certainly happened hundreds of years ago
among the far descendants of the Aztec. But, those ‘recent’
Indians were not the pyramid-builders and stone transporters
from much earlier times. The Indians the Spanish discovered
hundreds of years ago were the long, lost, future-children of
the Maya pyramid-builders. Pyramids are thousands of years old.
Once again, so much TIME separates various cultures. Human
history, which includes extremely intelligent humans, is so
much older and more extensive than we have been taught.
If a space-traveling race of people were to colonize
another planet…they would not bring with them construction
materials, giant engines and great power sources. They would
use their high level of knowledge and build with materials
found on the new planet. Natural power sources would also be
employed. The colonizers could have the ability to tap into
energy flows, such as EM fields, found on the new world. Could
this scenario apply to the ‘seeders’ of Earth and the first
Indians?
The idea of a primitive and barbaric Stone Age, whatever
that is, should not be confused with a time of (real) technical
gods and goddesses. There once was an idyllic age when our
distant ancestors could literally move mountains; a momentary
Heaven on Earth? Possibly, the great megaliths were transported
by mind-power initially and then later (in a less advanced age)
by machines?
We will still imagine images of dinosaurs, volcanoes
erupting and ape-like cavemen every time we hear mention of the
‘Stone Age.’ Films such as ‘10,000 B.C.’ and the ‘Flintstones’
only continue ignorant stereotypes. We should also be aware of
another, very different perspective regarding the remote past;
a more enlightened view of what came before. The proof is in
STONE that our ancestors were much more advanced than modern
men and women.
‘What is ape to man, a laughingstock, a
thing of shame? And, what is man to the Superman…a
laughingstock, a thing of shame?’
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Readers may be confused about including Egyptian and Mayan
stonework in a section concerning the Stone Age. One evokes
pictures of cavemen with crude tools while the other
demonstrates ‘remarkable’ building techniques by way of an
advanced knowledge. Our ancient ancestors worked in stone. This
level of construction is so far removed from anything simple or
primitive. Yet, we tend to lump our long lost STONE workers
into the category of barbaric pagans. Who knows how old the
perfectly-cut cities are of the Mayas and the Egyptians? We do
not know the age of prehistoric, stone complexes. We know not
when the large megaliths were cleaved and transported many
miles to their final destinations. True ages of these
masterworks go off the scale.
Students will read plenty of guesstimates in a wide range of
schoolbooks. They will alter in ‘time periods for the Mayan
empire or time periods for the Incan empire.’ Dates will also
change depending on which decade the books were written. Do not
believe fluid ‘dates’ at face value. Recognize that the Indians
lived for AGES; very long cycles of time.
Email Doug Yurchey at:
dugko@surfside.net
How could Science be so wrong? Almost at face value, nearly
without question, large portions (possibly majority) of people
think scientists are credible. Darwinism is taught in schools
everyday right along with fundamental Creationism. More
accurately, both ideologies are ‘mentioned.’ Some textbooks
split the page and have given each Creation system a fair
platform. At the end of the day, most people (generally) feel
comfortable that ‘if it is in the schools, then it is probably
a reasonable philosophy.’ Certainly, the men and women of the
sciences must know their fields of study better than anyone
else. Do not be so sure. We must question all traditions.
The following will specifically deconstruct Darwin
Evolution; or attempt to do so. There are big HOLES in ‘Darwin
Evolution’ that appear as ‘missing links.’
We have heard the common expression ‘missing link.’ The
reference symbolizes failed efforts to link ape to human. How
long has the scientific community tried to find the missing
link? The answer is ever since the formation of Darwin’s
philosophy. A few ‘Piltdown’ men later, the
half-human/half-apes that connect people to the families of
anthropoids have NOT been discovered. It is 200 years since the
birth of the English naturalist, Charles Darwin. We will
never discover all the missing links to the human-evolutionary
chain because our genesis on Earth did not happen that way.
Examine the next chart of ‘discovered,’ found, real,
honest-to-goodness, evolutionary links. The problem is;
scientists have been looking for links for a long time and
there ‘remains’ only a very, very few evolutionary connections.
There is not only the HUMAN missing links; there exists missing
links in every type of animal! Where are the LINKS?
There are too many HOLES in Darwinism, literally. Where is
the mother-specie between horse and bear or between horse and
cow? We should find earlier animal forms that are
mother-species; simpler forms that split into specialized, more
complex species. Where is the horse-bear that later split into
the horse and bear…or the horse-cow that later split into the
horse and cow? Earlier mother-species have not been discovered,
with only a few exceptions to the rule. They are missing
links and the many missing links in various species will
probably never be discovered. Primarily because they do not
exist, have never existed and history did not happen that way.
Basically, a cat has always been a cat. A dog has always
been a dog. The many root-species that should exist in our long
past have not been found, except for a very few known cases.
For the students that wonder, ‘possibly, the connective links
no longer exist or will be found in time?’ Consider the
extremely long stretches of time that exist in the world of
‘Darwinism.’ There should have been plenty of time for an
accurate, sharp (filled-in) picture of the past to materialize
in buried stone. Nowhere are the complete pieces to Darwin’s
Puzzle; the proven, finished ‘picture’ is not close to being
realized. Why are there no archeological records to support
clear change after change after change…as the millennia whipped
by like slow sands in an hourglass? Why are the rocks silent?
The truth is the rocks are not silent. They scream with
information. We should be prepared for the unique story they
reveal. The evidence, such as the ‘animal genealogy’ chart,
suggests a different beginning for life on this planet. LIFE
EXPLODED AT ONE TIME ON EARTH…geologically speaking, when you
consider looking back a million years. What the chart implies
is: BOOM...there was Life on Earth! Human life, animal life and
plant life in most of their varieties exploded into existence
in a relatively short time. What if human/animal and plant life
were not natural, but synthetic creations?
The very same can be substantiated or paralleled in the
PLANT world. We also have ‘missing links’ to the distant
ancestors, the mother-species of plants. Believe it or not, the
(essentially) same plant species have only been with us for a
matter of tens of thousands of years. Of course, prehistoric
plant-types have died out; became extinct exactly like many
species of animals. But, the long record of plant life from the
far past is largely missing as well. Plants may not be millions
of years old, but only a matter of thousands. If so, we have to
change our view of life naturally beginning over long expanses
of evolutionary time.
The evidence implies an ‘artificial,’ fabricated
human/animal and plant genesis rather than natural origins.
Were we ‘seeded’ here, as previously mentioned, in a short span
of time? Did someone or a group of people ‘plant’ life on Earth
just 50,000 years ago? Were we placed in a Garden of Eden? Are
we the future descendants of ‘space’ people?
‘No life has been observed that is not carbon-based.’
Why is life on Earth only carbon-based? Another oddity is in
the fact that known life, in every physical manifestation, is
CARBON-BASED and carbon-based only. What about silicon-based
life? Or, there could be life based on other elements? Is life
on other planets not based on carbon? After the primordial ball
of Earth cooled down (if it happened that way), couldn’t there
have been a whole range of proto-life forms in existence based
on different elements? Weren’t they all fighting to exist if
the ‘naturalists’ are correct? If there is anything to
‘survival of the fittest,’ the question remains; ‘How did
carbon-based life and only CB life have won the Nature Wars?’
Not a trace of another basis is present on Earth, yet there
should be. What does that signify? It could support the
hypothesis that nothing is natural when it comes to life found
on this planet. Every mammal, blade of grass, fish or flea
could have been manufactured. The only basis is one element
and only one: CARBON. The full spectrum of forms that we
observe is what can be genetically built using carbon and
adding the life spark. Known species, down to the tiniest
microbe, could be produced from a single carbon source.
Investigating ancient lore,
students may stumble upon a quaint story for the Creation of
Life on Earth. Egyptian god RA was responsible for generating
the first ‘human’ life on the planet tens of thousands of years
ago. With ‘tissue-samples’ from himself, the space traveler
copied (cloned) himself and also decorated the New World colony
with perfect plants and animals.
The above hypothetical, as fantastic as the idea sounds, is
a possibility. Such an origin story accounts for every ‘living’
thing on the old planet being carbon-based. Does the story have
a real world foundation? Is the ancient lore Atlantis in a
nutshell?
Author’s note: This writer believes in evolution! This
writer does not believe in Darwin Evolution.
Things CHANGE; everything ‘evolves’ and nothing ever stays
the same. There is always a process of transition. A factor of
TIME has been the emphasis of many of the paragraphs in this
text. We medium-sized-brained humans find it difficult to
really grasp very large tracts of time and its influence. Time
has a tremendous almost unseen effect, such as the slow course
of a river. In a million years, the water has carved a Grand
Canyon.
Environment absolutely physically affects the life forms
within it. Conditions of the environment can change the plants,
animals and people over great stretches of time. Evolution has
correctly pointed to certain animal changes that were results
of the natural surroundings. Cave fish, for example, that have
never experienced light have lost their eyes. They no longer
needed them and are now eyeless. Environments physically
changing people have occurred by the fact of different skin
colors. Groups of humans lived or were stranded in a variety of
temperate regions for long periods. Intense sun darkened the
skin of cultures in tropical climates. Areas of hardly any sun
have produced fair-skinned people. Our environment changes us
over time.
Evolution is right on the money when it scientifically
demonstrates and explores species’ transitions to other
physical forms as a direct consequence of the surrounding
environment. Again, the ‘genealogy’ chart marked a few recent
changes because of environment + time. That will be as far as
this writer can go on the subject of the accuracy of Evolution.
The huge error is…
WE ARE NOT NATURAL BY-PRODUCTS OF THE PLANET!
Students should examine the few ‘real’ charts of
evolutionary transitions and not merely accept Evolution charts
per se. Yes, actual changes in life forms have occurred, but
the question is not the metamorphosis of creature-phylum or
slight changes in a few species. THE QUESTION IS THE BIG
QUESTION OF CREATION. Here, is Darwin’s error.
We can backtrack a bit on the Chart of Life and notice
change, but not ‘creation’ or a materialization; a something
from nothing. Nature does not simply and naturally produce life
from a vacuum, even if the proper elements are present. No
matter how many Amino acids cook up for an eternity…the
sparsest hint of ‘intelligent’ life will never happen. We can
have a fish tank with only water; add the elements for life and
wait forever. Fish are not going to swim from one side to
another no matter how much time passes. But, if we ‘breed’
tropical fish in the tank…then, life flourishes in the right
conditions.
The same can be said for a virgin planet. During the long
(or is it short?) course of planetary creation, life does not
‘just happen.’ Life has to be made to occur on a planet.
Intelligent life will never emerge from chemical reactions.
Planets can harbor a wide range of life. To contain life, the
worlds must be SEEDED. Human life will never naturally appear
on a planet’s surface without a little artificial inducement.
WE ARE NOT ‘STAR-STUFF!’
Humans have not originated chemically from the inner bellies
of solar material. When Carl Sagan made the statement, it was
an atheist striking out against Creationism. It is a slogan, a
Madison Avenue campaign, a product meant to eliminate any type
of ‘intelligent act’ in the creation of humans. Star-stuff
erases the possibility of an intelligent-Creator or any type of
divine intervention. Star-Stuff, to Sagan, was a beautiful way
to describe our Creation scientifically. The concept is as cold
as space itself. Readers should be aware that the inspiration
for the film ‘Contact’ and host of the ‘Cosmos’ series publicly
debated against the idea of intelligent life in the universe
ever making ‘contact.’ While Dr. J. Allen Hynek (coined the
phrase ‘Close Encounters of the First, Second and Third Kind’)
opposed Sagan. Dr. Hynek learned to accept the reality of UFOs
and UFO contact.
The problem with Darwin Evolution is not so much the
‘evolution’ (even though more evidence suggests devolution) but
the Darwin aspect. We should not dismiss a philosophy of
change; evolution is how something changes over time. The
problem is when Evolution decides to answer THE ORIGIN OF
SPECIES. The Creation of all living creatures great and small
is not explained in Darwin’s slow-change. Do not perceive
reality through the eyes of 19th Century scientists. Views of
20th Century scientists were bad enough. Neither Church nor
Science has the answers to the mystery of humankind.
What of the discoveries by Dr. Leakey in Africa? What is the
significance of Lucy? Students can certainly find volumes of
information discrediting the small ape creature referred to as
‘Lucy’ by the anthropological scientists. Lucy serves as
science’s strong desire to unearth the hallowed ‘missing link,’
their Holy Grail. Isn’t this the same error of digging up one
bone and presuming an entire dinosaur? Are they not assuming
too much with Dr. Leakey?
Africa was not the motherland of human life on Earth.
(book excerpt) In later chapters, we will examine the concept
that our genesis did not occur in one location. The case will
be made for 13, simultaneous, Cradles of Civilization forming a
worldwide pattern. People did not emerge out of the dawn of
time in one Cradle of Civilization. Human life did not begin
only here at the Tigres and Euphrates Rivers, as was taught in
schools decades ago. Human life did not begin only there in the
jungles of Africa. If the Black Race wants to rally around its
prehistoric greatness, do not assume Mother Africa was the
beginning of all Homo sapiens. Rather, look to the stonework of
Zimbabwe ruins! Zimbabwe (‘House of Stones’) proves that the
FIRST AFRICANS were as magnificent stonecutters as the
Egyptians or Incans!
On the point of Dr. Leakey’s ‘Lucy,’ what matters more?
Should we believe one/tiny ape-thing as our ancestor that could
have been any advanced astronaut’s rejected, genetic
experiment? Or…do we place credibility in the fantastic,
conical, stone towers at Zimbabwe? Prehistoric Africans cut and
transported large monoliths? They most certainly did.
Zimbabwe’s main complex is the center of a vast system,
surrounded by smaller (stone) zimbabwes covering thousands of
square miles. We have not been taught to appreciate the
significance of such technological advances in prehistoric
times. The amazing cut and transported rocks of Zimbabwe trump
Lucy.
Did human life on Earth begin in our oceans? The naturalists
had to ascribe some beginning point; because what was before
so-called primates? Of course, it was the primordial soup that
is Earth’s oceans. Fish to amphibians to primates to modern
people in millions of years is the belief. How were the fish
created? Then, how were the amoebas created? Maybe our very
earliest, beginning point was not deep in the oceans. Another
‘alternative’ possibility exists when you consider that high
technology played a crucial part in human prehistory. Maybe our
very earliest, beginning point was UP above us out in space or
on another planet?
There are all these ‘problems’ with a natural view of the
world. Another example is how conveniently and easily,
scientists now assume a meteor 65,000,000 years ago wiped out
the dinosaurs. Why not 60,000,000 years ago? Why not 70,000,000
years ago? How they arrived at 65 million is anyone’s guess.
The presumption is because they found a big crater? For one
thing, simply, dinosaurs are not that old. That crater is
probably many millions of years old. The point is present-day
science loves NATURAL solutions; they embrace natural
solutions. But, an ‘unnatural,’ artificial (where intelligence
existed in the prehistoric past) type of answer is never
seriously considered by so-called scholars. We should not be
naturalists; we should be ‘unnaturalists.’
Keep in mind that a technique such as CLONING might not have
been a mystery to the ancients. Also, the art of genetic
engineering may explain a lot. Cloning could provide a real
world answer; at least, a good possibility of another way life
could appear on a planet.
Consider when Charles Darwin lived, two hundred years ago.
It was an era when ol’ time religions dominated and people
really were not that intelligent. These were ignorant times,
just after the 18th Century. The Church was king. Then, here
come the new sciences making breakthroughs in many departments.
Science was not going to close its eyes, then. Nineteenth
Century educators were not going to allow blinded superstitions
and thousand-year old traditions rule the day. Schools had to
adopt some of the new sciences. The movement eventually led to
the famous Scopes Monkey trial in 1925.
Charles Darwin’s views sounded good for their times, in a
‘modern, more enlightened’ age that desperately struggled to
combat the tired/stale teachings of the Church.
© 2009 Doug Yurchey
All Rights Reserved.
Presented with Permission of the author
