Can you prove that all human beings are of one species?

The Details of the Question

- According to evolution, human beings are made up of more than one species, not just one. However, according to Islam, humans are made up of only one species. Is that right?
- It is said that there is some evidence that there are other species. For example, the genetic material of the human species called Homo neanderthalensis is said to be found in normal people today. Also, skeletons of other species such as Homo sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo floresiensis are said to have been found in caves.
- Can you prove that such evidence is fabricated or a lie and that all humans are of one species?

The Answer

Dear Brother / Sister,

There are some charlatans who defend atheism, who use evolutionism, which has nothing to do with science and scholarship, as a screen to try to divert young people from their faith and channel them in the direction they want. Their scenario is this:

All living beings, including human beings, evolved from one another by chance. There is no creator. Everything is the work of coincidence and nature. According to them, such thinking is scientific knowledge.

The unimaginable frauds these charlatans have committed in the name of science to prove their claims have been revealed over time.

Many scientists who defend atheism have admitted after the scientific studies they carried out that living beings did not evolve from one another as it is claimed, but that each species was created with its own unique characteristics.

Now we will try to present the evidence put forward by those atheist charlatans in the name of science and how they were refuted by atheist scientists and their statements that each species was created independently by citing their sources.

1. Fossils of the Oligocene Period

Information about Parapithecus is based on two molars found in Egypt. The fossils found in the Oligocene period, which are said to belong to Parapithecus, are both very scanty and controversial [1].

Fossils from the Oligocene period are scanty. The fact that the existing ones are generally jaws with lost teeth and fragmented skulls makes it difficult to make an accurate decision about them [2].

They do not belong to a single creature; they were formed as a result of small fossil fragments of various creatures being put together accidentally [3].

In fact, fossils from the Oligocene period do not provide clear information about the ancestry of either today’s apes or Aegyptopithecus. They are not similar to today’s apes either. They are thought to be on the way to apes only in terms of some of their characters [4].

2. Fossils of the Miocene Period

The fossils that are accepted to characterize this period can be grouped in the Dryopithecinae family. This group is believed to be the ancestor of the present day Pongidae and Hominidae.

Dryopithecus were found in Europe and Asia. Dryopithecus africanus (Proconsul), Dryopithecus nyanzae and Dryopithecus major were found in Africa. Those found in Europe and Asia are grouped under the names Dryopithecus fontani, Dryopithecus sivalensis and Dryopithecus punjabicus.

It is claimed that orangutan, chimpanzee and gorilla were formed from this group [5].

3. Fossils from the Pliocene Period

Ramapithecus (Long-armed ape)

It is suggested that this primate, known from its jawbone and assumed to have lived in the Pliocene Period “may have come from Dryopithecus”. It is understood from its jaw fragments that the teeth became rounded, that the canines became relatively smaller and that the upper part became flattened. [5].

24 different measurements were made on the teeth of two species belonging to Ramapithecus and Dryopithecus (Fossil ape), which are considered to be hominids, and the results that were obtained were compared with those of chimpanzees of similar species in Liberia. It was found out that fourteen of the twenty-four measurements were smaller, one was the same and nine were larger than the chimpanzees. In conclusion, the difference in tooth size between living chimpanzees was found to be greater than that between Dryopithecus and Ramapithecus. [6],[7],[8]

Theropithecus galada, a species of baboon living in the highlands of Abyssinia, has incisors and front teeth relatively smaller than those of African apes. It shares with Ramapithecus and Australopithecus the rather compressed and worn lateral teeth, strong masticatory muscles and a less deep facial feature [9],[10].

It is generally accepted that Ramapithecus is not a hominid, and that this fossil is morphologically, ecologically and behaviorally similar to a chimpanzee or gorilla among the advanced apes. There is no evidence that it walked upright [11],[12].

4. Australopithecus (Ape of the South)

This name was given to various fossils found in East Africa by Louis Leakey and many others. The fossils found by Dart were named “Australopithecus africanus” (African man), and later Zinjanthropus, Paranthropus, Pleisanthropus, Telanthropus and Homo habilis were included in this group.

Australopithecus is considered to be a hominid that lived two to three million years ago, walking upright and using crude tools. Its brain volume is about 500 cc, the same as in some advanced apes. Its teeth are similar to those of Ramapithecus.

Zinjanthropus boisei, found by Louis Leakey in the Olduvai Gorge region of Tanzania, was found to be a variety of Australopithecus robustus. After that, Australopithecus was grouped under two species. One is Australopithecus africanus and the other is Australopithecus robustus.

4.1. Australopithecus Africanus (African Man)

It was found in Africa by Dart in 1924. It has small teeth, small jaws and a slender build. Its skull volume is estimated to be about 1/3 of today’s human, i.e., 500 cc, and its age is estimated to be 1.8-2.6 million years.

4.2. Australopithecus Boisei (zinjanthropus)

This form is considered a variety of Australopithecus robustus. It was found in 1959 by Leakey in Tanzania. It has very thick teeth, thick jaws and protruding upper temporal bones as in gorillas and orangutans. The dental arch and jaw arch are very parabolic. It is similar to orangutans and chimpanzees among advanced apes. The volume of the skull is 500 cc and the age is 2 million years.

It is claimed based on some pieces of the pelvis, arm and foot bones of both Australopithecus africanus and Australopithecus robustus that Australopithecus was an upright walking creature.

Criticism of Australopithecus

Almost none of the fossil material from the past is complete. In other words, the fossil material available represents a very small part of the organism to which it is claimed to belong. The fact that fragments of different organisms were brought together based on the assumption that they belong to a single species plays a major role in it. In addition, there can be very big mistakes in fossil age determinations. Therefore, during the evaluation of the organisms to which fossil materials belong, such issues should be taken into consideration and definitive statements should be avoided. As a matter of fact, the authorities in this field have expressed the opposite views about Australopithecus africanus.

Oxnard and Zuckerman, who investigated the Australopithecus fossil for years, state that Australopithecus is not an upright walking being. Oxnard and Zuckerman’s multi-faceted statistical research on Australopithecus africanus’ hand, wrist, foot, shoulder and pelvic bones shows that they do not resemble man, but orangutan and chimpanzee [13],[14],[15],[1---6].

Furthermore, the statement of Zuckerman, who worked with a team on Australopithecus africanus for 15 years, is definite:

It is impossible for Australopithecus africanus to be the ancestor of man [17].

All Australopithecus are completely similar to the advanced apes in terms of their cranial structure [18].

To put it briefly, the fossils that are claimed to belong to the Australopithecus group belong to different creatures and were shaped according to the ideas of evolutionists and plaster models were made accordingly.

Java man, Peking man, Heidelberg man and Meganthropus are grouped under the name “Homo erectus”. It is accepted that they lived approximately 500 thousand years ago. It is stated that they walked upright and their brain volume was approximately 1000 cc.

5. Java Man (Pithecanthropus Erectus)

Shortly after Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1858, Ernst Haeckel, inspired by Darwin, published his book entitled The History of Creation. In this work, Haeckel proposed the Mute Ape Man as the “ancestor of man”. He also gave it a Latin name: Pithecanthropus alalus. When this imaginary being would be found as a fossil, it would resemble a human being in some characteristics and an ape in others. They also specified where the remains of this being would be found: The hypothetical ancient Lemuria continent, stretching from Madagascar to India and from the Indian Ocean to Indonesia [19].

In 1887, the Dutch anatomist Eugene Dubois set out with his wife and children to Java, a Dutch colony in East India, as “a health care worker for the Dutch army”. Dubois was on his way to find the Mute Ape Man that Haeckel had suggested, in the same place they had shown. Two years after his arrival in Sumatra, Dubois convinced the government to conduct paleontological excavations in Java. Some prisoners were sent to the excavation by the Solo River near the village of Trinil, and soldiers were assigned the duty of controlling of the excavation. It is stated that Dubois did not participate in the field work in these excavations and that he examined the findings of the workers brought to him periodically at home [20].  

In 1891, Dubois made two important discoveries among the bones that came to him. They were a tooth and a skull found in the same fossil bed a month apart. However, their exact location could not be determined because they were not recorded during the excavation. At first, Dubois thought they belonged to a chimpanzee. A few months later, however, the prisoners found a femur at the same site. It was the femur of a person walking upright. Dubois combined these pieces to form Pithecanthropus erectus (Upright Walking Ape-Man). The brain volume of this being was about 900 cc. A small molar tooth was found in 1898. It was stated that those teeth also belonged to Pithecanthropus. The age of this being was estimated to be 500 thousand years.

When Dubois introduced those fossils at the International Congress of Zoology held in Leyden in 1895, the British zoologists claimed that those fossils belonged to a human, the Germans claimed that they belonged to human-like apes, and the French stated that they belonged to a transition form between a higher form of ape and man.

Criticism of Java Man

Koenigswald is of the opinion that the big molar tooth of Java Man belongs to an orangutan and the small one to a human. He states that the skull is similar to that of chimpanzees and gibbons [21].

In 1906, a major excavation was carried out in the place where Dubois found the fossils, but nothing was found except a small piece of bone. It is said that the being called “Java Man” is in fact a chimpanzee or gorilla type of ape, that the skull of the ape was combined with the human thigh bone and that it was given the name “Pithecanthropus erectus” [22].

It is noteworthy that the confession of Dubois, who found the Pithecanthropus fossil in 1922, was not taken into consideration. In his book named "Mankind in the Making" Howells, states that Dubois found two skulls with brain volumes somewhat similar to those of modern humans in the same place where he found the first fossil. However, Dubois did not reveal these skulls he found for thirty years. He professed thirty years later that the being he presented as Java Man (Pithecanthropus erectus) was actually a big gibbon monkey [23].

This explanation of Dubois is included as follows in the Encyclopedia of Archeology:

At first, there was much opposition to the status implied by the name the ape-man, ‘who walked erect’, but it became generally accepted though Dubois himself finally changed his mind and said that the fossils he found belonged to a giant ape, but this skull gained general acceptance” [24].

6. Nebraska man (Hesperopithecus Haroldcookii)

In 1922, a large molar was found by Henry Fairfield Osborn in western Nebraska and was named Hesperopithecus Haroldcookii (Nebraska Man).

It was suggested that this creature, which is estimated to have lived approximately 500 thousand years ago, belonged to the prehistoric ancestor of man and was half ape and half man. However, later on, it was realized as a result of detailed research that the molar called Nebraska Man belonged to a pig [25]-[26].

Although it was proved that the molar belonged to a pig, animations have been made with half ape and half man pictures drawn as Nebraska Man and movies have been made; and it has been advertised as the first ancestor of man in order to deceive young people.

7. Piltdown Man (Eanthropus Dawsoni)

Arthur Smith Woodward, the director of the London Museum of Natural History, and Charles Dawson, a medical doctor, dug out a jaw and skull fossil with a ceremony from a gravel pit near Piltdown, England in 1912. The jaw bone was very similar to that of the monkey, and the teeth and skull were very similar to that of human beings. Those materials were called “Piltdown Man” (Eanthropus dawsoni). The age was determined to be 500 thousand years.

In 1950, the amount of fluoride absorbed by the bones from the soil was tested in order to determine the age of Piltdown Man. If the fossil had allegedly remained in the soil for 500,000 years, it would have contained a lot of fluoride. However, there was no fluoride in that fossil... Thus, it was discovered that the material of Piltdown Man was not a fossil, and that it had not remained in the soil for more than a year when it was discovered.

Later, it was found that the bones, which were subjected to a serious examination, were stained with potassium dichromate to give the appearance that they belonged to the past. Teeth on the jaw bone had been rasped so that they would have a worn and torn appearance [27].

Thus, they had combined the jaw of a 10-year-old orangutan with human skull and placed human teeth on the jawbone to make it resemble a being between an ape and a human.

When the people who were responsible for this hoax were searched, no one took the blame. Arthur Smith Woodward and the medical doctor Charles Dawson, who planned this hoax and dug the bones out of the gravel pit with a great ceremony, had died. The journals and other publishing organizations that presented the issue did not accept responsibility.

In the 1930s, the discussions about “did man’s brain or body develop first?” were answered by bringing evidence from Piltdown Man. As a matter of fact, Smith indicates this issue and states the following:

The most interesting aspect of “Piltdown Man” is that it justified the idea that ‘the brain was first in the evolution of man’. The idea that human beings got rid of being apes thanks to the development of the head structure is the most realistic view. Man is an orangutan whose brain is highly developed. The importance of the Piltdown skull lies in its strict validation of those judgements [28].

Clark Howell attracts attention to the fact that the scientific circles were deceived by Piltdown Man for 50 years:

Piltdown man was nothing more than a being that consisted of a human skull and an ape’s jaw. It was a hoax placed on purpose. They declared it as the common ancestor of man and ape that lived 500,000 years ago. Some 500 books were written on it. The paleontologists were fooled for 50 years with that discovery [29].

The fact that the Piltdown hoax could not be understood for about 50 years despite the research of the greatest authorities of the world increased the doubts about the other fossils. S. Zuckerman holds the view that when the Dubois fossils of Java Man is examined seriously, the result will be no different than the Piltdown Man [30].

8. Pekin Man (Sinanthropus Pekinensis)

Dr. Davidson Black found two molar teeth in 1921 in a depression in the village of Choukoutien, 40 km away from Beijing, China, and called them “Sinanthropus pekinensis”. W. C. Pei found a third molar tooth in 1927, and several skull fragments and two pieces from the jaw in 1928. Black said those fossils belonged to Peking Man [31].

Peking Man fossils were found in Choukoutien in a large cave whose ceiling collapsed and was filled with sediments left by the waters. Human fossils are considered to be in the same place and in an upper cave. The cave where Peking Man was found was 200 meters wide and 50 meters deep, and there was a lime quarry there. This lime quarry collapsed and everything in this two-story cave was buried under thousands of tons of stone. The skull of Peking Man was found in this pile of debris and buried ashes [32].

According to O’Connell, the fact that the stones were brought from far away and used in the buildings and the presence of a lime quarry and huge ash heaps indicate that lime was burned there. The fact that there was lime production in Choukoutien shows that the houses were built in a certain way and order [33].

As a matter of fact, Breuil reported that two thousand roughly worked stones were found under the heaps of ashes in the debris containing the skulls of Peking Man and the bones of about 100 different animals in a pit 132 meters wide and 12 meters deep in the same place. The tools found there are not primitive in nature. Carving and digging works, the structure of other tools and fine craftsmanship were not found in France until the Upper Paleolithic period. Afterwards, 10 fossils belonging to modern man were found in the same place where the skulls of Peking Man were found [34].

In 1936, three more skulls were found in the same place by F. Weidenreich and Pei, who led the German excavations. Although the volume of the first skull that was found was reported to be 900 cc, it was reported to have increased to 1200 cc in 1936.

The lower jaw and all characteristics of the teeth in the fossils alleged to belong to Peking Man resemble those of apes. The canines are distant from the neighboring incisors, as in some chimpanzees and gorillas. Similarly, the upper canines are considerably longer than the other teeth. The lower canines are small and correspond to the large anterior teeth. Thus, except for a few, the jaw and dental characteristics of these fossils are similar to those of orangutans and chimpanzees [35].

The materials belonging to Peking Man were lost between 1941 and 1945, except for two teeth. None of them have been found to date. Many stories concerning the disappearance of this material have circulated. The most common one is that they may have been lost or confiscated by the Japanese during the Second World War. However, none of these stories has been verified. No living person apparently knows what happened to the materials.

When Davidson Black died in 1934, his work was continued by F. Weidenreich. Weidenreich stated that he based his Peking Man models on the skulls that were found by Pei in 1936 and that were later lost [36].

Weidenreich’s models have been met with skepticism and severe criticism by some. Gish expresses it as follows:

There is no evidence other than models and descriptions of those materials left by a few investigators. All of those investigators are evolutionists are totally committed to the idea that man had evolved from animal ancestors. Even if a scientist is as completely objective as humanly possible, the model of description he fashions on the basis of scanty and incomplete material with reflect to a critical degree what he thinks the evidence ought to show is doubtful. All we have available are the models fashioned by Weidenreich. How reliable are these models? Are they accurate casts of the originals, or do they reflect what Weidenreich thought they should look like? [37]

O’Connell believes that the fossils of Peking Man were not taken by the Japanese but that they were planned to be lost during the war. According to him, the Japanese did not enter Choukoutien. He claims that Weidenreich and Pei continued to excavate until 1940 and that Pei destroyed the fossils that did not fit the models made for Peking Man before the Chinese government returned to Beijing [38].

All researchers agree that Peking Man was killed and eaten by hunters because the brains of all the skulls were struck with force and broken. Their brains were probably removed and eaten. According to O’Connell, Peking Man was either a large baboon or a large macaque killed and eaten by the workers in the old quarry [39].

In 1952, Boule and Valois, concluded after a detailed study of plaster casts of Peking Man that Java Man and Peking Man were very similar. The two groups were combined into a single species and the Java Man fossil was named Pithecanthropus erectus and Peking Man was named Pithecanthropus pekinensis. Afterwards, they were united under the name Homo erectus [40].

9. Human Skull (Skull 1470)

In 1972, a skull and a leg bone were found by Richard Leakey by Lake Rudolf near Turkana, Kenya. Leakey states that this fossil is 2.8 million years old and that the shape of the skull and the cranial wall are similar to modern humans. It is noted that the skull does not have eyebrow ridges and even contrasts with the protruding eyebrows of Homo erectus. Although the 1470 man was three times older than Homo erectus, his brain was almost the same size [41].

This fossil of Leakey’s disproved the claims that “Austrolopithecus was the ancestor of man” because it is superior to Australopithecus both in terms of brain capacity and skeleton [42].

Besides, the 1470 man is 2.3 million years older than the 500,000-year-old Sinanthropus pekinensis and Pithecanthropus erectus but it has a more modern appearance than them. On the other hand, 300 stone crushing and breaking tools were recovered from the strata in which 1470 man was found, which shows their high level of intelligence and skill [43].

10. Neanderthal Man (Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis)

It was discovered by Dr. Fuhtrott in the Feldhofor cave of the Neanderthal valley in Düsseldorf, Germany in 1856. The skull size of the Neanderthal Man, a race of Homo sapiens, is about as big as that of modern man. It is estimated to have lived 35 thousand to 100 thousand years ago. Neanderthal Man has been described and presented for more than a hundred years as “a thick-eyed being with a coarse nature, wild-character that walked in a curved state”. In fact, the difference between Neanderthal Man and today’s man is less than the difference between the current people of different tribes [44].

The protrusion of the mouth and eyebrows, which are the characteristics of the Neanderthal race, is typical of the black race. Neanderthal man has a curved skeletal structure. In his article called “Neanderthals Had Rickets”, Ivanhoe states that this structure is not due to kinship with apes without tails, but due to the joint and bone disease caused by lack of vitamin D.

It is known that Neanderthal Man grew plants, painted pictures with elegant tools, had some religious beliefs, buried the dead and used a kind of scripture [45].

Today Neanderthal Man is classified as “Homo sapiens” (today’s man). It is stated that Neanderthal Man could not be distinguished from other people if he walked in our streets wearing overalls [46].

Paleontologist Erik Trinkaus draws attention to the fact that there is no difference between modern man and Neanderthal Man and states the following:

Neanderthal ruins and detailed comparisons made between Neanderthal bones and modern human bones show that there is no difference in Neanderthal’s anatomy or in terms of his movement, instrument use, intelligence or speech.” [47].

It is claimed that Neanderthal Man was absorbed by dominant races over time [48].

There are many different opinions and thoughts about Neanderthal Man. Noting that almost everyone has a comment on this issue, Wells states the following:

“Currently in the news is the never-ending controversy over Neanderthals. Were they our ancestors? Were they a separate species, now extinct? Or were they a race of humans, eventually absorbed into our modern global family? Almost every month, a proponent of one view or another takes to the print media or the airwaves, declaring the matter settled. Wait a few months, however, and someone will probably say the opposite with equal confidence [49].

Mentioning the same issue, James Shreeve says:

I talked to one hundred and fifty scientists—archaeologists, anatomists, geneticists, geologists, dating experts—and sometimes it seemed I had come away with one hundred and fifty different points of view about the place of Neanderthals in human evolution. Any theory about Neanderthals is like the weather in many parts of the country: If you do not like it, wait a little while and it will change! [50]

11. Cro-Magnon Man (Homo sapiens)

It was found near Eyzi in France in 1868. They are considered to have lived twenty thousand years ago. Their height is 1.85 and brain volume is 1500-1600 cc. They have a dolichocephalic head structure. It is claimed that they “came to Europe from Africa and suddenly disappeared”. Since it is a dominant race, it is stated that the Neanderthal race was assimilated in this race. It is stated that Cro-Magnon Man is very similar to the present-day European Man, and that it is almost impossible to distinguish between them [51].

The fossil called Homo Florensis probably belongs to a race of human beings in appearance. In other words, its Latin name should be Homo sapiens too. However, it is difficult to say anything definite since some parts were filled with plaster. Researchers are not allowed to examine these fossils. Therefore, it is possible that it is not a separate species, but a race within the human species.

To conclude, species and even individuals are so perfectly created and they are adorned with such feelings and emotions that it is impossible for an iota of coincidence and randomness to interfere with them. Each human being is like a realm. His miraculous creation, structure and feelings cannot be explained by such evolutionary quackery. The claim that he came from the evolution of other living beings is also a fallacy. It has no scientific value.

If Allah wanted, could He not create one living being from another, as evolutionists claim? He could. For creationists, it is not a problem at all. Allah can create a horse from a dog and a dog from a horse but there is no scientific evidence for it. Allah has made the genetic structure of each group of living beings immutable. The genetic structure of any living being does not change in such a way to give rise to another living being.

The genetic makeup of a species is called its gene pool. For example, the genetic makeup of all human beings constitutes their gene pool. Small changes occur within this gene pool. We call them variations. Human beings are not all the same like photocopy paper. They have many differences from one another but they all fall within the basic human type.

You can consider other living things in this way. For example, rabbits have a different gene pool, horses have a different gene pool.  That is, rabbits have a different basic type and horses have a different basic type. Genetically, it is not possible for them to be genetically distant or close to each other. That is what science tells us about these laws set by Allah. however, some people consider their dreams, not science, as truth and present their dreams as scientific knowledge.

References:

[1] Guyer, M. F. Animal Biology. New York. Harper; Brothers, London. 1937.

[2] Katz, S. H. Biological Anthropology. Readings from Scientific American. San Fransisco, 1974.

[3] Shipman, P. Baffling Limb on the Family Tree. Discover, 1986, September.

[4] Şengün, A. Evrim. Sermet Matbaası. Kırklareli. 1984, p.142.

[5] Demirsoy, A. Kalıtım ve Evrim. Meteksan Yay. No.11. Ankara. 1984

[6] Pilbeam, D. R. Nature. 1968, Vo1.219 p.1335.                    

[7] Simons, E. L. and Pilbeam, D. R. Folia Primatol. 1965, Vo1.3. p. 81.

[8] Eckhard, R.B. Population Genetics and Human Origins. Scientific American. 1972, Vol.226

[9] Pilbeam, D. R. Gigantopithecus and Origins of Ho­minidae. Nature. 1970, Vo1.225. p.518.

[10] Broom, R. and Schepers, G. W. H. Transv. Mus. Mem. 1946, Vol.2. pp.1-272.

[11] Shipman, P. Baffling Limb on the Family Tree. Discover, 1986, September.

[12] Eckhard, R.B. Population Genetics and Human Origins. Scientific American. 1972, Vol.226.

[13] Oxnard, C. University of Chicago Magazine, 1974, pp.8-12.

[14] Oxnard, C. The Place of the Australopithecines in Human Evolution:  Grounds for doubt? Nature. 1975, Vo1.258. pp.389-395.

[15] Zuckerman, S. Journal of the Royal College of Sur­geons of Edinburg. 1966, Vol.1. pp.87-115.

[16] Zuckerman, S. Beyond the Ivory Tower. Top­linger Publ. Co. New York. 1970, pp. 11-12,64,75-94.

[17] Zuckerman, S. Beyond the Ivory Tower. Top­linger Publ. Co. New York. 1970, pp. 11-12,64,75-94.

[18] Montagu, A. Man: His First Million Years. Word Publishers. Yonkers. 1957, pp.51-52.

[19] Richard, M. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. Transl. İ. Kapaklıkaya. Son Tartışmalar Işığında Darwinizm’in Mitleri. Gelenek Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2003

[20] Richard, M. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. Transl. İ. Kapaklıkaya. Son Tartışmalar Işığında Darwinizm’in Mitleri. Gelenek Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2003

[21] Boule, M. and Valois, H.M. Fossil Man. The Dreyden Press. New York. 1957, pp.118-123.

[22] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Transl. Â. Tatlı, Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

[23] Howells, W.  Mankind in the Making. Doubleday and CO. Garden City N. Y. P. 1967, 155-156.

[24] Cottrell, L. The Concise Encyclopedia Arc­heology. Hawthorn. New    York. 1960, p. 394.

[25] Gregory, W. K. American Museum of Natural His­tory. Science.1927, Dec.Vol.66. pp.579-581.

[26] Ivanhoe, F. Neanderthals Had Rickets. 1970, Nature. 8.Aug.

[27] Smith, G. S. Woodward’s Folly. New Scientist. 1979, 5 April, p.44.

[28] Smith, G. S. Woodward’s Folly. New Scientist. 1979, 5 April, p.44.

[29] Howell, C. Early Man New York: Time Life Books, 1973, pp.24-25.

[30] Zuckerman, S. Beyond the Ivory Tower. Top­linger Publ. Co. New York. 1970, pp. 11-12,64,75-94.

[31] Boule, M. and Valois, H.M. Fossil Man. The Dreyden Press. New York. 1957, pp.118-123.

[32] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Transl. Â. Tatlı, Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

[33] Richard, M. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. Transl. İ. Kapaklıkaya. Son Tartışmalar Işığında Darwinizm’in Mitleri. Gelenek Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2003

[34] Lintor, R.The Tree of Cu1ture. New York. 1955, pp.8­9,110.

[35] Richard, M. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. Transl. İ. Kapaklıkaya. Son Tartışmalar Işığında Darwinizm’in Mitleri. Gelenek Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2003

[36] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Transl. Â. Tatlı, Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

[37] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Transl. Â. Tatlı, Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

[38] O’Connell, P. Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis. Hawthorne, CA. 1969.

[39] O’Connell, P. Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis. Hawthorne, CA. 1969.

[40] Boule, M., Valois, H. M. Fossil Men. New York: Dreyden Press, 1957.

[41] Leakey, R. E. Skull 1470. National Geographic. 1973, Vo1.143. pp.819-828.

[42] Waechter, J. Prehistoric Man. London. Octopus Books Limited. 1977.

[43] Leakey, R. E. Skull 1470. National Geographic. 1973, Vo1.143. pp.819-828. 

[44] Dobzhansky, T. Changing Man. Science. 1967, Vol.155, p.  410.

[45] Use of Symbols Anteclates Neanderthal Man. Science Digest.Vol.1.73.1973. p.22.  

[46] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Transl. Â. Tatlı, Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

[47] Trinkaus, E. Hard Times Among the Neanderthals. Natural History, Vol. 87, December 1978, p.10

[48] Şengün, A. Evrim. Sermet Matbaası. Kırklareli. 1984, p.142.

[49] Wells, J. ibid. p. 206.

[50] Shreeve, J. The Neanderthal Enigma. New York: William Morrow, p.252, 1995.

[51] Gish, D.T. Evolution: The Fossils Say No! 1981. Tercüme; Âdem Tatlı,  Fosiller ve Evrim. Cihan Yayınları, İs­tanbul. 1984.

Questions on Islam

Was this answer helpful?
Author:
Questions on Islam
Subject Categories:
Read 4 times
In order to make a comment, please login or register