Evolution of Man

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 265, 5 August 1937, Page 13

Evolution of Man

Sir, —In your issue of yesterday there was an article under the above heading, reporting a. lecture by Miss Mary Graham under the auspices of the Wellington Theosophical Society. In a Christian community keen for education, such statements as those made at this lecture should not go unchallenged, as they are not based on facts. It may be assumed that the Theosophical Society and the great majority of your readers believe in the Bible. This evolution theory is an absolute contradiction of tlie Scriptures. aud up to this time not one single scientific fact has been established to disprove the Genesis narrative of the crea-

tion. All evidence to date and the vast volume of archeological data proves conclusively that the process of the human race has been one of devolution both physically and mentally, and what Miss Graham calls concrete evidence supports this. The monoliths, frescoes, rock carvings, -etc., and the great pyramid in particular, built over 4000 years ago, rising

to a perfect apex to 468 feet and covering thirteen acres of surface, baffles the intellect of our cleverest men to-day as to how they were done. The greatest monuments of present-day engineering pale into insignificance when compared with the great pyramid of Gizeh. Arts and crafts of 4000 years ago were of a standard quite unapproachable to-day. Charles Darwin, the father of the evolution theory, all of whose books I have read, never gave any of his reasonings as facts in proof of man’s evolution, and never beyond saying, “We may assume.” Tlie late Sir George Darwin, sou of Charles Darwin, iu addressing the British Association in South Africa on August 16, 1905, of which he was then president, said: "The mystery of life remains as unpenetrable as ever.” Evolutionists themselves openly ac-

knowledge the uncertainty of their data. No less authority than Professor Tyndall said: “Those who hold the doctrine of evolution are by no means ignorant of the uncertainty of their data,” while Professor J. A. Thompson, of Aberdeen University, and Professor Patrick Geddes, of Edinburgh University, when championing the cause of evolution in an article in a publication, actually made this pitiable confession in answer to the question, how man came:

“We do not know whence he emerged, nor do we know how man arose, for it must be admitted that the factors of the evolution of man partake largely of the nature of may-be’s which have no permanent position in science.” That this planet may have been the abode of humans prior to the Genesis statement of re-creation is highly probable; in fact, the Scriptures lend some support to such a probability; but to state (hat any life existed on onr earth prior to the Genesis statement is a flat contradiction of the Scriptures and God’s creative work. Our duty to the rising and future generation. is to educate them truthfully and not in fables.— I am, etc., T. O. HAYCOCK.

Eastbourne. August 4.