Our Occulted History: Do the Global Elite Conceal Ancient Aliens? by Jim Marrs Read Free Book Online

process known as natural selection. This supposes that those species best adapted to environmental change are best suited to survive. Although Darwin never explicitly stated that man descended from the ape, his devotees advocated that conclusion, drawing criticism from religious fundamentalists. The idea of survival of the fittest is perhaps the best known of Darwin’s principles and has been taught in schools for several generations.
    The evolution account is familiar—fish evolved into amphibians, which changed into reptiles, which became birds and mammals, which eventually evolved into humans. “However, it is far easier to explain this to schoolchildren—with cute illustrations and pictures of a lineup of apes (beginning with those having slumped shoulders, transitioning to those that are standing upright)—than it is to prove,” cautioned Will Hart, author of The Genesis Race . In fact, Darwin’s theory continues to generate controversy because, as Hart pointed out, it “is the only scientific theory taught worldwide that has yet to be proved by the rigorous standards of science.”
    Even after a hundred years of effort, no one has been able to fully substantiate Darwin’s theories through documented fossil exhibits. Yet Darwin’s theory of evolution continues to be taught in most schools and continues to generate controversy. The late Harvard biologist Stephen Jay Gould noted, “All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups [of species] are characteristically lacking.”
    Darwin never actually insisted that man descended from the ape. This was a conclusion of his followers. Darwin himself admitted to giant holes in his own theory. “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down,” he wrote in On the Origin of Species .
    No such indisputable linkage to complex organs has yet been found, and some respected scientists use this as evidence against the theory of human evolution. Lehigh University biochemistry professor Michael Behe, after studiously researching blood clotting, cilia, the human immune system, transfer of materials between cells, and nucleotides, concluded that these aspects of human physiology are too “irreducibly complex” to have evolved from “less complete” predecessors through natural selection. Proponents of the intelligent-design theory of life seized upon Behe’s work as justification for their beliefs.
    In 2005, Behe presented his theory of “irreducible complexity” in a Pennsylvania court case challenging a school district mandate that a statement about intelligent design be included with evolution in science classes. U.S. District Court Judge John E. Jones III, a conservative Republican appointed in 2002 by President George W. Bush, ruled that the required statement was unconstitutional because Professor Behe’s claim was not science but a form of creationism, a religious belief that had been “rejected by the scientific community at large.”
    HUMAN CHRONOLOGY REVISED
    Although Behe’s ideas were rejected by the court, could he have been on to something about human development and the way it fits in with the theory of evolution? After all, we have every reason to doubt the timeline of our development, as it continually is being revised. For example, fishhooks and fishbones dating back 42,000 years were discovered in a limestone cave in East Timor in early 2012. This finding indicated that humans were capable of skilled, deep-sea fishing 30,000 years earlier than previously thought. One of the discoverers, Sue O’Connor of the Australian National University’s Department of Archaeology and Natural History, told the media, “There was never any hint of [what] maritime technology people might have had in terms of fishing gear 42,000 years