In this article we carry out an analytical study for our readers.
Our aim is to contribute to our readers developing a critical perspective with regard to Darwinism, which is defended as a dogma in modern science.
Our subject matter is tooth fossil findings attributed to human evolution.
The specimen we shall be looking at comes from NTVMSNBC.COM, which has made a publishing policy out of setting out headlines and captions for stories regarding the theory of evolution in the form of Darwinist myths.
The article in the 6 March 2004 edition was titled “Teeth Belonging to the Earliest Human Beings Found.” The article caption read:
“Six 5.2 million-year-old teeth belonging to a previously unknown hominid species have been discovered in Ethiopia. The creature is believed to be a pre-human species and is thought to be one of the first hominid creatures in the transition from ape to man.”
Our analysis will be performed from this perspective: Fictional earliest human beings are being “advertised” in the NTVMSNBC.COM headline and caption. Will NTVMSNBC.COM back up its initial propaganda with solid foundations in the rest of the text, so adorned with impressive headlines? We shall see that this is not possible, but let us first provide some brief information about the discovery of the teeth in question:
The discovery consists of six tooth fragments found in Ethiopia by Yohannes Haile-Selassie[*], curator and head of physical anthropology at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History in Ohio, USA, and his team. 1 The researchers ascribe these teeth, estimated to be around 5.8 million years old, to a new species, which they gave the name Ardipithecus kadabba and maintain represents the first imaginary hominid assumed to have emerged after the alleged division between human beings and chimpanzees. This interpretation of course stems from the researchers’ own evolutionist preconceptions. We include a picture from their article in Science magazine as evidence of that prejudice.
The tooth on the left of the picture belongs to an existing female chimpanzee; on the right is depicted the interlocking of the upper and lower canine teeth of the imaginary hominid named as Ardipithecus kadabba. The researchers interpret the similarity between them from an evolutionist point of view and claim that A. kadabba was “the first living thing in the transition from ape to man.”
Looked at objectively, however, the likelihood that A. kadabba is an extinct species of ape is manifest. The reason for this is evident: Although there are 120 species of ape living today, it is estimated that this number rises to 6,000 when all extinct species are added to it. Since A. kadabba’s large canine teeth can lock together in the same way as those of the chimpanzee, A. kadabba can be regarded as an extinct species of ape. In short the claims regarding these teeth stem from a one-sided and dogmatic perspective.
Furthermore, the fact that the owner of these few teeth has been declared to be a “hominid” in the headlines does not render the claims about these teeth any further than a wide-ranging speculation. Looking at a few teeth fragments and declaring that they belong to an ape-man is no different to dreaming in broad daylight. The entity being commented on is a living thing whose attributes are unknown but which is assumed to have existed. Therefore, the subject is open to personal interpretations, prejudice and imagination. The comments are therefore again far from being realistic.
In an article titled “Hunting the First Hominid,” Pat Shipman, an adjunct professor of anthropology at the Pennsylvania State University, USA, compares the claims on this subject to “a soup flavoured with speculation and prejudice:”
Some say hominids are fundamentally thinkers; others favor tool-makers or talkers; still others argue that hunting, scavenging or bipedal walking made hominids special. Knowing what the First Hominid looked like would add some meat to a soup flavored with speculation and prejudice. 2
Documentation of the Deception in the NTVMSNBC.COM News Text
At the beginning of this article we said that the NTVMSNBC.COM report represented a typical example of Darwinist propaganda and that in order to see that we need to examine in the body of the text the bases of the impressive statements in the headline. As can be seen below, no sound foundations for these evolutionist claims can be seen when such an analysis is performed; as there are no foundations, the documentation of the deception emerges.
Although the headline states, “Teeth Belonging to the Earliest Human Beings Found,” it says in the text that “Haile-Selassie thinks that the creature Ardipithecus kadabba is the first species to appear after the chimpanzee and man parted during the evolutionary process.” (Our emphasis. At the same time this statement documents how NTVMSNBC.COM carries its thinking, which consists of a Darwinist assumption, over into the headline and portrays it as a scientific fact!)
The Tactical Logic in the Propaganda
The qualities which make the NTVMSNBC.COM report a typical piece of Darwinist propaganda are apparent for all to see: NTVMSNBC.COM depicts the evolutionist claims regarding the teeth in question in its headline and caption as definitive facts. Yet not one sound foundation for these statements is to be found in the body of the text. This is something one frequently encounters in stories in the media about evolution.
Why is that? The answer lies in the expectations of the media organisations that have ideologically assumed the task of providing support for the theory of evolution. That expectation is made a reality by their making use of a known reading habit of many readers.
Instead of examining texts full of scientific terms (such as Ardipithecus kadabba, hominid etc.), some readers generally make do with just reading the headline and captions. Darwinist organisations such as NTVMSNBC.COM are well aware of this, and make use of it when employing deceptive Darwinist myths in their own headlines and captions. That being the case, there is a very strong probability that a report written according to evolutionist prejudices will leave the impression that “scientists have found teeth belonging to the earliest human beings” in the minds of readers who are not fully aware of the invalidity of the theory of evolution.
However, as the analysis in this article clearly demonstrates, the Darwinist claims in question are entirely speculative.
We call on all our readers to be on their guard against Darwinist propaganda tactics of the kind exposed in this article, and we reiterate our advice that readers should not decide on stories regarding evolution in the media without visiting our website first.
We shall continue to monitor the activities of all media organisations, such as NTVMSNBC.COM, that follow a Darwinist line and shall continue to expose their efforts to depict their imaginary speculations as scientific facts.
[*] The name of the researcher appears as Yahoos Haile-Selassie on NTVMSNBC.COM, though that spelling is actually incorrect.