Pure speculation, that's all it
is. Regardless of what world philosophy you espouse (i.e.
evolution or creation), this recent headline simply goes a little
too far.
A 5-inch-long animal that looked
more like a mouse than a man may be the earliest known ancestor of
modern humans, according to evolutionary scientists.
Strikingly resembling a shrew, the fossil was unearthed in China
and is believed to be around 125 million years old. They say
the discovery is important because "scientists who study
human evolution are interested in learning how such early
ancestors developed and eventually turned into other species."
Go figure.
Now, looking at this from a neutral
perspective, what is wrong with the picture? Are these
scientists being objectionable, approaching this fossil find with
an open mind and unbiased opinion? The question needs not be
answered. Sadly, they already have the assumption that man
evolved over millions of years from a tiny shrew-like creature
(which, mind you, still exist today), which millions of years
before that came from a rock, which millions of years before that
came from nothing. That's right, nothing. You have to
believe that the world came from nothing if you deny any type of
Creator.
Says Dr. Zhe-Xi Luo, a vertebrate
paleontologist at the Carnegie Museum, "This mammal could be
our great, great-aunt or uncle, or it could be our
great-grandparent, 125 million years removed."
Unfortunately, no evidence to support such has yet been given . .
. in fact, no more evidence than to say that we evolved from the
household mouse which live right beside us day after day after
day.
True science. That's what the
world yearns for. Hopefully, and as is our goal,
TrueAuthority.com can and will fill this void.


Racism On The Discovery Channel
byJordan Niednagel
TrueAuthority.com
Racism can be subtle, and rear its
ugly head in the most subtle of ways, but folks shouldn't have to
watch the Discovery Channel too long before realizing that racism
is at the heart of a new documentary titled, "The Real
Eve."
Go to their website, or simply turn
on the TV, and you'll see why. Put on display for all to see
are dark-skinned, African people, some holding babies, others
seemingly roaming nowhere, holding their spears and other
"primitive" weapons. The question is: Why?
Why trace our human roots back to Africa, and the African people?
This is a sensitive subject, but
because Discovery has the audacity to do what they've done, I want
to, as a white person, show how incredibly low
it is, and why people, of all races, should be very concerned.
Evolutionary teaching says that we
evolved from more primitive life-forms, and of those life-forms,
apes (in their species) stand at the forefront. After apes,
however, what were there? Simply put, people, though on a
lesser progressive scale. By displaying dark-skinned, African
people, Discovery (and evolutionary teaching itself) is clearly
insinuating that they are similar to our primitive ancestors, and
are therefore
lower on the evolutionary scale. We, as white, Anglo-Saxons,
are more developed, simply because we have cars and computers and
other nifty technologies.
Can you see it? Is it not
clear? Can you not see the subtle, yet clear message they
give here? It's sickening, and something needs to be done
about it.
If you believe we descended from
dark-skinned peoples, than why not be racist? If, however,
you believe in a Creator who made us all equal, and with equal
capacities, there is no reason for such. Regardless of your
perspective, I ask that you contact Discovery and voice your
concern. Email them at letters@discovery.com,
or call 1-859-342-8439.


Super Croc Found In The Sahara
by Jonathan
Robison
TrueAuthority.com
As
we always endeavor to point out, life of long ago was bigger and
better than today. More species' existed, and nearly all
grew to larger and more impressive sizes. Truly, nature has
not progressed.
Further
supporting this theory is the recent discovery of one of the
largest crocodilian species to have ever lived, dubbed "Super
Croc." Believed to have reached 40 feet in length (they
apparently only discovered the head), the reptile would have made
Africa's ancient riverbanks a dangerous place, even for a
dinosaur.
"We
had never seen anything like it," said Paul Sereno, a
professor at the University of Chicago and a National Geographic
Explorer-in-Residence. "The snout and teeth were designed for
grabbing prey–fish, turtles and dinosaurs that strayed too
close."
Interestingly
enough, reported sightings of crocodiles as large and even larger
than Super Croc have been made in a few remote parts of world,
namely Central Africa and South America. Natives describe
some as reaching more than 60 feet in length, dwarfing even this
40-foot fossil find. Hard to believe, yes, but
impossible? Only time will tell.
TOP
|