*read. learn. {share.} help.

// Who is LUCY the Austral- opithecus? Hominid? REAL? FAKE? THE MISSING LINK? #lucy #hominid #evolution #truth* 3K+ ↓↓   ↓

Google homepage has turned their title logo (11.24.2015) into an animated blasphemous evolution promoting banner, to try to deceive people into thinking that "LUCY" - a monstrous ape was somehow the missing link between humans and apes. This should be easily dismissed by anyone who knows and cares about the truth of humans and how important they are, as the Holy Bible says they were designed by the Lord God...

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27 kjv).

1. Use your intelligence and think about this: If evolution were a fact, that would mean that everything that supposedly "evolved", did it so long ago that no one has actual record or witness of it, and then it stopped and never happened again. That is stupidity created by people who are desperate to have reasons to reject Jesus and what he did for them. Evolutionists often try to use examples of something changing that are actually scientifically defined as "adaptation", adapting to specific needs of environment rather than a so called "change of kinds" - or evolution.

2. Use your intelligence and think about this: If apes figured out how to turn into humans, then why are there still apes? Some apes decided that they didn't want to become humans? Isn't that sad for them! Their relatives must talk about it: "I can't figure out why the black sheep side of our family decided not to make the change."

As for the monster called "Lucy" - well some people think it's a total fake. Some people think that if it was real, it was just a real ugly ape, or a real ugly person. Artists "jazz it up" to supposedly show us how it looked like a monkey / human mix - however they can't really do that because they don't really know what it looked like. Let's get intelligent and scientific about it...


"Though all evolutionists admit that the creature had an ape’s head and brain and ape-like arms, hands, and feet, and no speech capacity, it is alleged by many that it walked uprightly, which was “the first step toward becoming human.”

There is wide disagreement even on this point, though. While Lucy’s founder Donald Johanson strongly argues that Lucy walked bipedially, it must be recalled that Johanson has too much of a personal stake in the matter to be unbiased. He became famous simply on the basis of being the discoverer of the Lucy bones. Dr. Duane Gish observes that Johanson “is one of those once obscure anthropologists who have become famous overnight following extravagant and sensational claims concerning the discovery of fossil remains of alleged human ancestors” (
The Fossils Still Say No, p. 241).

Johanson’s view has been strongly contested by other scientists.

Dr. Solly Zuckerman, for many years the head of the Department of Anatomy of the University of Birmingham in England and a scientific adviser to the highest level of the British government, said of the
Australopithecus family that “THEY ARE JUST APES” (Roger Lewin, Bones of Contention, p. 164). Zuckerman studied the fossils of this creature for 15 years in minute detail with a team of scientists. They compared every important detail of Australopithecus fossils with the bones of hundreds of humans and apes. For example, they compared the pelvic bones of Australopithecus with those of more than 70 humans, 94 great apes, and many others of monkeys and baboons. Zuckerman concluded that Australopithecus did not walk erect. He said,

“For my own part, the anatomical basis for the claim that the australopithecines walked and ran upright like man is so much more flimsy than the evidence which points to the conclusion that their gait was some variant of what one sees in subhuman Primates, that it remains unacceptable” (Beyond the Ivory Tower, p. 93).

Zuckerman’s research also found that the foramen magnum (the aperture at the base of the skull through which the brain is attached to the spinal cord) is located in an apelike position, which is behind the center of the skull, rather than in a human position, which is at the center of the skull so that the head balances on the spinal column.

“... we found that the condylar position index in the australopithecine skull was very much closer to the ranges we found for apes than in three human types we also studied. This seemed to us to dispose of the claim that the australopithecine skull was balanced as in a human as opposed to an ape skeleton” (Beyond the Ivory Tower, p. 79).

Zuckerman’s minute study of the sagittal crests in the australopithecines (something that apes have on the top of their skulls but humans do not have), comparing them with about 800 skulls of apes, also demonstrated that the
Australopithecines did not walk uprightly.

“... we concluded that the existence of sagittal crests in the australopithecines implied that they had carried their heads like apes and not like man” (Beyond the Ivory Tower, p. 85).

Zuckerman also debunked another line of “proof” behind the theory that the australopithecines were missing links. This is based on the idea that the type of wear on the premolar and molar teeth follow the human pattern. Supposedly, apes are unable to grind their molars like man, but Zuckerman’s extensive research disproved this. After examining the teeth on about 100 gorilla, chimpanzee and human skulls, Zuckerman said,

“Our observations showed that the order in which the facets of wear on the cusps of practically no difference in the order of coalescence of the facets of dental wear in apes and man, and particularly in the wear of the molar and premolar teeth. If, therefore, the pattern of wear in man is due to his ability to grind his molar and premolar teeth, it followed that the ape must be able to do the same...” (Beyond the Ivory Tower, p. 87)." - source: Way of Life Literature

"USA Today (March 21, 2001) reported, "Paleontologists have discovered a new skeleton in the closet of human ancestry that is likely to for science to revise, if not scrap, current theories of human origins." Reuters reported that the discovery left "scientists of human evolution....confused," saying, "Lucy may not even be a direct human ancestor after all."" source. Another words, "science" keeps changing it's mind(s), because they have no truth to be founded and grounded on. I watched a scientific special that proved that a specific area had been carved out by a massive flood over the period of several hours - once proven by science to have taken millions of years.

We are not apes that turned into men. There is no such thing as a missing link, or the fulfillment of such. As for walking apes? Well Ive seen all manner of monkeys, apes, gorrillias (what ever you want to call them) that have gotten up on their back legs and stood or walked some steps - but that does not make them men. They did not stand or walk like men, they walked like animals. But even if they walked the same as men, that still would not make them men. In fact, if you are at the zoo, and see one do this, and you yell out to the crowd "Hey look, he's evolving into a man" - you will get lots of laughs and people will stare at you like they are staring at an idiot.... and yet they believe in evolution...

This video is located here, in case you want to share it with others.


{Do you agree?}

{We} Must teach #truth freely @worldwide; and we know Truth 696 is #effective > when linked @facebook, ETC... Help us work & share truth simply by linking it.

// One Christian Ministry requests November PRAYER to Jesus for our ministry team // +share your prayer needs+