Please Note:  The pictures and content reproduced here are solely for journalistic critique, not commercial purposes.  Also, no assumption or implication is being made that the authors, scientists, or artists involved are racist.  It may well be that they are all strongly opposed to racism, however, the theory itself is inherently racist and thus has historically produced the bitter fruit of racism whenever it became the dominant worldview.

Magazine Review of Scientific American, issue - January 2000.
© Updated July 2003 Sid Galloway     

Has "Scientific American" unwittingly revealed the racist root and fruit of evolutionary theory that is subtly socializing your children?

Why do artist's always show supposedly more primitive ancestors, with "non-Caucasian" features? This Jan 2000 magazine theorizes about two competing evolutionary lines, which are of unequal survivability.

This image is from a brief article in this Jan 2000 issue, looking back at an old January 1900 article about Zulu men.
(p. 10) Note the similarities in appearance between the men in this photo, and the imaginary drawing below, which evolutionists call "ape-like".

This image is an artist's guess about what a supposed, "primitive" ancestor (homo habilis) of modern man looked like (p. 57). Yet the few bones from which the artist extrapolates are fragmented and no skin or other tissue is ever present. There is no way they can know how the soft tissues were arranged, colored or how hair looked. Some "ancient" skulls have been later shown to be extinct apes. Also the rock tools found near the skulls are similar to tools used today by cultures who eat monkey and ape brains out of skulls they smash. So the skulls of homo habilis (see pics here) (1) are thought by some to be recent, yet extinct apes (2).

A more recent, TIME MAGAZINE, article (June 23, 2003) provides further evidence of the racist mindset underlying the theory of evolution and its portrayal in the modern media.  Even if the authors and artists involved are not racist, there is no excuse for taking a tiny sample of bones, and then creating an imaginary drawing that clearly links "primitive" men with modern people of African heritage.  Why did they draw this "primitive" man with dark skin, kinky hair, and thick lips?  If evolution were true, then why couldn't it be that "primitive" people were white, with long blond hair, and blue eyes? Natural selection does produce characteristics that match the climate, environment, etc., but natural selection does not prove macro (vertical) evolution from apes to humans.  Please see www.answersingenesis.org for proof of this fact.

This image from the cover of the Scientific American article shows the proposed, more advanced, more "evolved", ancestral line of man.
Please note that the carbon dating methods used to estimate the age of bone fragments are very questionable, beyond a few thousand years. See the resources by creationist, Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, one of few scientists to earn three doctorates from prestigious universities. He narrates a video series, ORIGINS, with beautiful photography, which presents awesome evidence contradicting the modern theory of millions and billions of years of evolution.
To order resources: Answers in Genesis 1-800-778-3390

This image is of the author and illustrator of the lead Sci-Am article in question. Ian Tattersall (left) is curator in the Dept. of anthropology at the American museum of Natural History. Jay Matternes is an artist and sculptor who for 40 years has specialized in fossil primates and hominids.

     It is at the very least interesting and curious that the author, the illustrator, Scientific American magazine, and virtually all evolutionary theorists have chosen to present more "advanced" hominids as increasingly Caucasian in appearance. They portray the ones they say are more "evolved" with lighter skin, thinner lips, straighter hair, and even Caucasian cartilage structures and facial fat deposits.

     It could be mere coincidence that the vast majority of recognized evolutionary theorists are from European ancestry, and thus look like a product of the "advanced" branch of their imaginary ancestral tree. Additionally, it could be coincidence that the subtitle of Charles Darwin's infamous book, ORIGIN OF SPECIES, refers to the "Preservation of Favored Races". It could also be coincidence that the renowned evolutionist, Sir Arthur Keith, wrote that, "The German Fuehrer [Hitler] . . . has consistently sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution." (Evolution and Ethics, Putnam, NY, USA, p. 230, 1947). It might even be coincidence that Eastern religions, which believe in an eternal evolutionary process of reincarnation, have developed an oppressive system of castes, where some are deemed more worthy than others, while those of lower castes suffer for it at the hands of the more favored groups.

     On the other hand, it might not be coincidence at all, but rather the fruit of a common root. The Bible says that when man rebelled against God's way of unselfish love, the world fell into a pattern of violent, selfish competition, pain, suffering, fear, and death (Genesis 3; 6:5; 9:3; Romans 8). Scripture also records the past 6,000 years of man's history as a tragic record of wars, genocide, and eugenic campaigns, all fueled by the sinful belief that "we are are more worthy to survive than them". Man has "civilized" his violent, selfish rebellion and made it more subtle, calling it euthanasia, abortion, and biological warfare. But Jesus was right. We can know the root, by the fruit hanging on the tree (Matthew 5-7). The bitter fruit born out of evolutionary ideologies has always been insidiously poisonous (Galatians 5:16-25). Evolution is a racist religion, where the core virtue is competition and survival of the more effectively violent. That is, more efficient at using, consuming, and eliminating the competition.

     Parents, your children are increasingly exposed to this kind of subtle, evolutionary racism through TV, movies, textbooks, etc.. And like spiritual osmosis, such "socialization" (3) soaks into their soul and becomes a part of their beliefs, attitudes, reasoning, and behavior patterns. So it's no wonder that new generations are manifesting more and more self-absorption, disrespect, rebellion, and racial violence. Remember how socially contagious we humans are. When one person yawns, almost everyone else in the room yawns too.

     Fathers, please understand your responsibility to train them to discern truth from error. They need to know not only what they should believe, but especially the rational evidence for why they should believe it. Make use of the wonderful resources God has made available to socialize your little lambs toward "God's Way Home - Hypotasso Faith - The Way of His Son" (4).

     Pastors, please think prayerfully about the future. Could it be that the weed of evolution is again about to produce another society like Hitler's third Reich? If so, may God have mercy on us all, because we now live in a global village! Whatever the Lord allows as He lets man's sin expose itself for what it really is, we know He provides a way for our churches and families to reveal something different (His Holiness, soli deo gloria) (5). (Deut 6; Psalm 78; Proverbs 1-2; Eph 3-6).

Web Links on Creation vs. (Evolution & Racism):

April 2000, Oregon biology professor forced out -
Pointed to flaws in theory of evolution:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_fosterj_news/20000414_xnfoj_biology_pr.shtml

Especially Ken's video, Evolution: The Anti-God Religion of Death 1-800-778-3390

This document is copyrighted © 1999 by Sid Galloway. All rights reserved. Reproduction and/or distribution for non-commercial purposes is permissible providing that this document is left fully intact, and source cited. Please do not modify this document in any way without prior written consent. Thank you.            Back to: Racial Peace Back to: Family Bible Church Back to: Biblical Family Soulcare