A couple of weeks ago we wrote Günter Bechly Says Darwinism Fails Again. Günter was claiming that a new humanoid species found in the Philippines somehow disproves the idea that we evolved from an ape-like ancestor. He wrote:
The neo-Darwinian theory of macroevolution has failed on all fronts, from mathematical feasibility, to theoretical plausibility and explanatory power, to empirical support.
Nothing new has happened since then, but Klinghoffer just posted this at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog: Paleontologist Günter Bechly: “No Well-Established Tree of Fossil Humans”. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
On a new ID the Future episode [Wowie, another Discoveroid podcast!], Discovery Institute paleontologist Günter Bechly talked with host Andrew McDiarmid about recent fossil finds that scramble yet again what scientists thought they knew about human origins.
Everything we thought we knew is scrambled! Klinghoffer says:
They discuss the discovery of remains of Homo luzonensis on Luzon Island in the Philippines, hailed as a new human species and dated to between 50,000 and 67,000 years old.
This is the same stuff Günter wrote about before — except that now they’ve made a podcast about it. That’s all the excuse Klinghoffer needed to post something at their creationist blog. He tells us:
A fascinating question is how the creatures got there, considering that Luzon is not now and was not then connected to the mainland. A hypothesis that they had the skill and intelligence to sail runs up against, among other problems, the fact that the oldest preserved boat, a canoe, is just 8,000 years old. It’s another reminder of what a “mess” (Dr. Bechly’s characterization) the fossil record is.
What’s Günter claiming here? If we’re not yet certain about how Homo luzonensis got to the Philippines, then what? The intelligent designer — blessed be he! — created them there, with no ancestors? Klinghoffer quotes Günter:
There is no well-established tree of fossil humans, contrary to the impression you might get if you look at many textbooks. [Gasp!] And that’s mostly because there is a very chaotic rather than an orderly distribution of these primitive and modern characters in various fossil humans. So the character pattern does not align well with a nested hierarchy.
It’s “chaotic!” Günter seems to be one of those creationists who insists that examples of every generation of every species on Earth should be well-preserved in the fossil record — and already found — so we can easily see how, over millions of generations, one species gradually becomes another. Lacking that kind of impossible detail, he is eager to reject evolution and embrace the “theory” of intelligent design.
Klinghoffer helps us to understand what Günter has just said:
Meaning that it does not fit, either, with Darwinian expectations, though evolutionists seek to keep that fact decorously veiled from the public.
Yes, we’re desperate to keep it a secret. He continues:
Download the podcast or listen to here. [Link omitted.] See also [Günter’s earlier post that we mentioned in our first paragraph].
So there you are, dear reader. Nothing new here, except a thrilling Discoveroid podcast you can add to your collection.
Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.