Abasta,Emily Grace G.

We have all seen the ape to man series in science books and in museums, and this is presented as
though it has been revealed by infallible authority, and Darwin is the modern day prophet of this
supposed new revelation of man's beginnings.
We quoted from William Howells in the third chapter where he claimed that Darwin did not
actually say that men were descended from monkeys, however Howells should have read his
master's writings a little more carefully, for in Darwin's Descent of Man he did state in numerous
places his belief that men were descended from apes or monkeys.
One good example should suffice for the present purposes. In the sixth chapter of his
Descent, titled On the Affinities and Geneology of Man, Darwin wrote: "There can,
consequently, hardly be a doubt that man is an off-shoot from the Old World simian stem; and
that under a genealogical point of view he must be classified with the catarhine [Old World
monkeys] division . . . But a naturalist, would undoubtedly have ranked as an ape or a monkey,
an ancient form which possessed many characters common to the catarhine and platyrhine
monkeys, other characters in an intermediate condition, and some few, perhaps, distinct from
those now found in either group. And as man from a genealogical point of view belongs to the
catarhine or Old World stock, we must conclude, however much the conclusion may revolt our
pride, that our early progenitors would have been properly thus designated." (1)
It once again becomes necessary at this point to attempt to find out whether or not Darwin
provided any real evidence for the thesis that he just proposed: Did Darwin present any
conclusive proof for the evolution of humans from apes having taken place, whether in the
present or out of the distant past?
Surprisingly enough, we find out that on both counts Darwin candidly admitted that he had no
proof at all for his thesis- that he had found no evidence for man's supposed evolutionary
descent from "lower" animals!
For Darwin's answer to the first query, we find where he wrote in his Descent: "But we must not
fall into the error of supposing that the early progenitors of the whole simian stock, including
man, was identical with, or even closely resembling, any existing ape or monkey." (2)
Thus Darwin admitted he had no current evidence for any type of a "missing link" that would
substantiate his theory of the evolutionary descent of man from apes or monkeys.
The next place to look to find out if Darwin documented any proof for his speculations of
evolution from monkey or ape to man ever having occurred would be in the past. Darwin wrote
in the Descent: "With respect to the absence of fossil remains serving to connect man with his
ape-like progenitors, no one will lay much stress on this fact . . . those regions which are the
most likely to afford remains connecting man with some extinct apelike creature, have not as yet
been searched by geologists." (3)

So he presented no evidence from the past of human evolution ever having occured either! The
only answer he could muster was the excuse that the search for fossils is a very slow
andlaborious process, and that the geological record was imperfect, thus his plea to the lack of
fossil evidence for his theory was the same rather weak excuse he had made previously in his
Origin as to why there had been no sign of the transitional links between any species that would
have validated evolution: we just haven't looked hard enough. I would be interested in finding
out if there was any material at all in Darwin's writings that could shed some light on whether or
not he had ever made any proposition that he was able to back
up with observable facts.
And he admitted once more: The great break in the organic
chain between man and his nearest allies,which cannot be
bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been
advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is
descended from some lower animal. (ibid, Descent, Chapter
Six: Birthplace etc.)
Thus we see that Darwin himself provided no really hard
data to show that men were descended from anthropoid
apes- it was all entire speculation!
He went on to state (Descent, Chapter Six, ibid) that this lack of evidence for his theory would
not trouble anyone who believes in evolution! And we see that it does not!
This is rather incredible, that the man whom countless evolutionists over the past century and a
half have anointed as the one who proved human evolution beyond a doubt, frankly admitted in
his Descent of Man that he had no evidence for it ever having occurred! Not a shred of proof at
all!
Since there are only two types of creatures that have ever lived on this earth, either creatures
living today and/or creatures that have lived in the past, and Darwin admitted that there was no
evidence from either source for validation of his theory, I pointed this out on the Talk.Origins
Feedback board (June 1998), and had Kenneth Fair from the University of Chicago respond to
this.