The Descent Of Man

Last modified on 04/03/2014, 06:43 PM

Oui, l'homme a bien connu les dinosaures. Et pas que l'homme, d'ailleurs.

 

Is Homo erectus our oldest ancestor? Science says yes, but this answer is not science: just an opinion, not quite justified indeed. Several Homo sapiens' fossils could be much older.

 

Darwin, son of the capital, father of the struggle for survival"How old man is - we cannot even faintly guess. One thing however is a biologically certain fact: he is by no means of recent extraction, but of extremely ancient age. (...) Man's descent is shrouded in mystery: it is an unbroken succession of missing links! The lateral branches of the primates were lopped off on some half a dozen occasions in the Earth's history; and only these reveal to us their earlier forms." (source)Bellamy, Moon, Myth and Man

 

That is the summary of our scientific knowledge. This text was written more than seventy years ago. But in this long period of time the state of scientific knowledge about our origins has progressed little. Sooner or later, a theory that does not work must be abandoned. This is a scientific law as well as a bloody evidence. I mean if you care about efficiency, which does seem to be the case for followers of Darwin... who doubted the validity of his own theory!

 Did man know dinosaurs? This Ica stone, Peru, seems to attest it.


 

360 Million Years Old Biped Skull

 

The extremely ancient descent of man, based on facts and fossils, is a cat among the pigeons for paleo-anthropologists. Some snipers, challenging Darwin and his theory of evolution, think that Hominidae are posterior to 'modern' man. To them, our origin is way older. We keep on going further. "Everything has been said, and we arrive too late for 7000 years that men has been existing and thinking" said La Bruyere.in its "Characters" Two centuries later, Homo sapiens sapiens' age jumped from 7000 to 150,000 years.

 

This way, we became billion years older in three centuries.

 

La Bruyere on the heath

 

Despite the cult of Darwin, numerous fossils of Homo sapiens have been found in geological layers aged several hundred thousands of years. But because of the cult of Darwin, as age of those fossils went against the dogma, they have been lost or given to collectors. David Childress cites fossils of modern man 300 000 years of age, 500 000 years and even one million years. Other authors as Andrew Tomas, Michael Cremo, William Corliss, Frank Edwards… talk about five million years and more.

 

How old man is - we cannot even faintly guess.

 

The website Impossible Discoveries, faithful to its dedication as a pioneer, gave us this new scoop: "In 1842, a human skull, badly preserved, was found in a 15 to 50 million year old lignite. This object is part of the collection of Freiberg's mining academy in Germany. In july 2005, M. Mohammed Zaraouit discovered in a marble quarry at Tafilalet, Morocco, in a devonian geological layer, a little fossilized crane belonging to a primate, who must be a biped and aged of 360 million years." (source)

 

200 Million Years Old Modern Shoes

 

Fossil of modern sole, 200 million years old ...Magazines like Nexus or Top Secret regularly broadcast such informations. Like those 200 million years old human footprints. The fossil shows the sole of a modern shoe. We can distinctly see the deeper mark of the heel. Those amazing imprints are still visible at Paluxy River's site,near Glenn Rose, Texas, USA. In 1988, Dr Hans ZillmerIn his book "Darwin's mistake" cites some disconcerting discoveriesClick on > below of the same type, so did Michael Cremo in his book Forbidden Archeology. Guess what anthropologists said about these books? Nothing.

 

However, when facing such evidences, we feel dizzy. And shocked. 

 

L'homme a même connu certains dinosaures d'un peu trop près.