This article is based on one section of a PowerPoint presentation that I did for the Design Science Association of Portland in May of 2024. The title of the talk was “Evolution’s 14 Greatest Frauds” where the Ape-To-Man Progression was listed as fraud number 9. I would describe this evolutionist fraud as the most influential fraud of all time. It is not only iconic but also ubiquitous throughout western culture. Images like the one in Slide #1 have caused many of the youth of today to conclude that the ape to man evidence is enough to convince them that evolution is a fact, and the Bible is wrong.
Slide #1
In Slide #2 is an image of the cover of a 200-page book from 1970 the contents of which have influenced millions upon millions to believe that the evolution of man from an apelike creature is scientific fact.
Slide #2
In Slide #3 is one of the first illustrations in the Early Man book. This is known as “Haeckel’s Progression.” Slide #4 contains the caption enlarged for the illustration in Slide #3.
Slide #3
Slide #4
Unfortunately, the sentiment of the last sentence of Slide #4 is still held by most evolutionists today. In Slide #5 is another progression cartoon published in 1939 showing evolution from a fish precursor to man. Included are a series of transitions of one kind of life to another kind of life. There is absolutely no evidence for these transitions. The missing links are still missing, and there is no scientific reason to believe any will ever be found!
Slide #5
In Slide #6 is the progression from the Early Man book which is total fiction.
Slide #6
In Slide #7 are the words creationist Professor Marvin Lubenow wrote about the Early Man depiction of the ape-to-man progression.
Slide #7
It is interesting that the writer of the Early Man book wrote that the figures in the progression were built-up from a few fragments, a jaw, some teeth…they were products of educated guessing. This statement had about as much effect as do the declarations that come with alcohol and tobacco products that warn users of their detrimental effects.
Look back now at Slide #6 and take note of the top line of ape figures. They are all clearly depicted walking. The Early Man writer wrote, “Although proto-apes and apes are quadrupedal, all are shown here standing for purposes of comparison.” Lubenow responded with the words, “outrageous, and I am amazed!” And then Lubenow wrote the words in Slide #8.
Slide #8
Lubenow closed his comments with, “Yet no evolutionist protested this gross lack of scientific objectivity!”
In Slide #9 is the cover of the November 1985 edition of National Geographic magazine. National Geographic is a consistent and enthusiastic promoter of deep time, evolution, and anything Darwinian.
Slide #9
Slide #10 shows the progression as depicted by the National Geographic article, “The Search for Early Man.”
Slide #10
In Slide #10 notice that from Australopithecus afarensis to modern man, the bodies are almost identical except for the amount of hair. However, the heads are shown to vary greatly. This is total fiction not at all supported by science.
In Slide #11 are the first two figures from the progression, Australopithecus afarensis and A. africanus. These were apes, were knuckle walkers, and could never have run like they are depicted in this series.
Slide #11
Nor could the next two in the series have run as shown in Slide #12. Australopithecus robustus and A. boisei were also knuckle walkers. And Homo Habilis is a jumble of Homo and Australopithecus bones; he never existed. Homo erectus was a fully human individual who suffered various pathologies. If his maladies were serious enough, he probably could not run either.
Slide #12
The three guys in Slide #13 were all regular humans. Any of them could have had either a lot or a little body hair. They could all run and some of them could run better than others depending on their training and the specifics of how their bodies were constructed which depended largely on individual genetics.
Slide #13
In Slide #14 are the words by Dr. John C. Whitcomb regarding the differences between apes and men.
Slide #14
Perhaps the best explanation for the paleoanthropological worldview is per Slide #15.
Slide #15
Seriously, there is a good way for the Biblical Christian to understand the fossil evidence, and that is to understand that the bones in the rock record are of just two categories as seen in Slide #16.
Slide #16
And in conclusion, the ape-to-man progressions boil down to be just illusions in the minds of evolutionists put forward with the hope of influencing people to reject the Creator God and the Bible.
Slide #17
J.D. Mitchell
