the fossil record that we have dealt with so far, unbridgeable
anatomical gaps between men and apes also invalidate the fiction
of human evolution. One of these has to do with the manner
Human beings walk upright on two feet. This is
a very special form of locomotion not seen in any other mammalian
species. Some other animals do have a limited ability to move
when they stand on their two hind feet. Animals like bears
and monkeys can move in this way only rarely, such as when
they want to reach a source of food, and even then only for
a short time. Normally, their skeletons lean forward and they
walk on all fours.
Well, then, has bipedalism evolved from the quadrupedal
gait of apes, as evolutionists claim?
The human skeleton is designed
to walk upright. Ape skeletons, however, with their
forward-leaning stance, short legs, and long arms,
are suited to walking on four legs. It is not possible
for there to be an "intermediate form" between them,
because this would be extremely unproductive.
Of course not. Research has shown that
the evolution of bipedalism never occurred, nor is it possible
for it to have done so. First of all, bipedalism
is not an evolutionary advantage. The way in which apes move
is much easier, faster, and more efficient than man's bipedal
stride. Man can neither move by jumping from tree to tree
without descending to the ground, like a chimpanzee, nor run
at a speed of 125 km per hour, like a cheetah. On the contrary,
since man walks on two feet, he moves much more slowly on
the ground. For the same reason, he is one of the most unprotected
of all species in nature in terms of movement and defence.
According to the logic of evolution, apes should not have
evolved to adopt a bipedal stride; humans should instead have
evolved to become quadrupedal.
Apes' hands and feet are curled
in a manner suited to living in trees.
Another impasse of the evolutionary
claim is that bipedalism does not serve the "gradual development"
model of Darwinism. This model, which constitutes the basis
of evolution, requires that there should be a "compound" stride
between bipedalism and quadrupedalism. However, with the computerized
research he conducted in 1996, Robin Crompton, senior lecturer
in anatomy at Liverpool University, showed that such a "compound"
stride was not possible. Crompton reached the following conclusion:
A living being can either walk upright, or on all
fours.224 A type of stride between
the two is impossible because it would involve excessive energy
consumption. This is why a half-bipedal being cannot exist.
The immense gap between man and ape is not limited
solely to bipedalism. Many other issues still remain unexplained,
such as brain capacity, the ability to talk, and so on. Elaine
Morgan, an evolutionary paleoanthropologist, makes the following
confession in relation to this matter:
Four of the most outstanding mysteries
about humans are: 1) why do they walk on two legs? 2) why
have they lost their fur? 3) why have they developed such
large brains? 4) why did they learn to speak?
The orthodox answers
to these questions are: 1) 'We do not yet know;' 2) 'We
do not yet know;' 3) 'We do not yet know;' 4) 'We do not
yet know.' The list of questions could be considerably lengthened
without affecting the monotony of the answers.225
224 Ruth Henke, "Aufrecht
aus den Bäumen," Focus, vol. 39, 1996, p. 178.
225 Elaine Morgan, The Scars of Evolution,
Oxford University Press, New York, 1994, p. 5.