Using a story for a bridge

The chasm between man and chimp continues to trouble evolutionary theorists.

Quotes and comments;

1. 'Mosley quoted John Shea, professor of palaeoanthropology at Stony Brook University in New York, making a remark that casts doubt on the whole evolutionary story: “There's such a huge gulf between ourselves and our nearest primate relatives, gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos,” he said, putting his faith in a big IF: “If that gap were populated by other hominids, we’d see that gap as not so much a gulf but rather a continuum with steps on the way.” [1.]

- That evolutionists keep trying to account for the 'gulf' (chasm) between man and chimp shows me that this is a problem they find disturbing, one that causes doubts in the theory itself. For the theory to have any credibility, evolutionists will have to come up with a plausible story that can bridge the miles wide gap between man and ape.

The Christian who accepts the Genesis account doesn't believe this gap will ever be filled, and that the only 'bridge' across it will forever be a story. The materialist stares at all the evidence he could need for rejecting Darwinism, but he turns his back on it. He prefers having no answer to accepting the biblical account of creation.

The greatest mistake our thinkers have made is to call man an animal; this is the source of endless errors in science, culture, theology and about every important subject there is. The uniqueness of man is obvious, but Darwinists won't admit it, as their theory won't allow uniqueness.
Calling man an animal isn't observational science, as man's uniqueness is what we observe not his identity. It's comical that people make this claim in the face of the evidence against it; you'd be closer to the mark if you insisted a sparrow was a fish.

It's clear to me that human beings and animals do not belong in the same category.

M. Johnson

Notes;
1. Avoid Confusion: Disbelieve Paleoanthropologists; Creation/Evolution Headlines
June 28/2011
1. 'Mosley quoted John Shea, professor of palaeoanthropology at Stony Brook University in New York, making a remark that casts doubt on the whole evolutionary story: “There's such a huge gulf between ourselves and our nearest primate relatives, gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos,” he said, putting his faith in a big IF: “If that gap were populated by other hominids, we’d see that gap as not so much a gulf but rather a continuum with steps on the way.”
Too bad all the species of Homo that Mosley discussed in his article appear just as equidistant from chimpanzees as the rest of us.'
3. Evolutionists have been unwilling to abandon the chain of being idea; that there are small steps all the way from the supposed first cell to man himself. Shea just assumes that such gradation existed among the human races that once (supposedly) existed. The Christian who accepts Genesis, denies that such races existed, and affirms that there has never been more than one human race.
4. '...a commentary in PNAS, Bernard Wood wrote, “The origin of our own genus remains frustratingly unclear.”
- That paleoanthropologists can't figure out the origin of the human species is good evidence you would think that the model they're using is wrong. Apparently it's taboo however to question the Darwinian model.
All we get from these people is hype and wild stories; stories that are endlessly changing. (Trying to pin these guys down to anything is like trying to pin down the location of an electron.)
The science content approaches zero.