Chapter 2 –
Man’s appearance on the
Earth
When reading about the history
of mankind, we are often told by textbooks and books about evolution, how the
first men lived on the Earth already hundreds of thousands or even millions of
years ago. It has been thought that men are descendants of some lower-form
animals, and it of course needs time. It would indeed be strange to claim that
evolution took place over a short time, and therefore, the idea has been
supported by the time span of hundreds of thousands, millions or billions of
years.
We should note. However, that observations regarding the increase in population
and the history of mankind do not refer to long periods of time. On the
contrary, based on them one can only conclude that humans have appeared on the
Earth for less than 10,000 years.
The increase in population does not support
the idea of the beginning of mankind being way up in the past. We can see it
from the next examples:
- According to calculations,
the population doubles every 400 years. (Shorter times for this doubling have
also been mentioned. We must also note that abortions and contraception were
impossible in the past as they are nowadays.). If we use this doubling speed
and the idea that people have existed already 16,000 years ago as the basis, the
current population should be about 1,099,510,000,000, which are almost 200 times
more than what it is in reality. It is such a huge figure that such a population
could not even exist on Earth. This also indicates that the beginning of mankind
cannot be pushed too far into the past, otherwise the surface of the Earth would
have filled up with dead bodies and the present population would be many times
larger:
The total population of six
billion mentioned in the beginning will be reached in 1999. Thus, there has been
an increase of five billions in less than 200 years. A hundred years ago,
scientists estimated that the Earth will not be able to carry a population of
more than six billion. In 1950, the population was only about 2.5 billions, but
the limit of five billion was already exceeded in 1987. Only 11 years were
needed for the last increase of one billion. For the sake of comparison, one can
calculate that the present speed of population increase will lead to people
filling up the entire surface of the Earth in the year 3530, and in 6826 all the
people will not fitted in the entire known universe.
If we go backwards from the figures of today and assume the annual growth at the
current speed or 1.6%, we will come to the conclusion of the first family living
in 625 A.D. or 1,375 years ago.
The supporters of the theory of evolution are not wiling to calculate figures
connected to the increase of the population, because over a period of time of
millions of years, the figures become so huge that the situation becomes
impossible. After hundreds of millions of years, the crust of the Earth would in
practice be covered by dead animals and the remains of humans, and this number
of people alone would fill the entire known universe. However, the theory of
evolution requires long periods of time. According to the theory, the Homo
erectus who lived 1.6 millions years ago, for example, was long and muscular,
almost like a modern man, and certainly very reproductive as well. (8)
- If we use the speed of
doubling mentioned above as the basis (the population doubling every 400 years)
and go back 4,000 years in time, there should have been more than 1,000 times
less people than nowadays or only about 5 million people. This seems to be a
plausible estimate, and fits together with the idea that the first people lived
on Earth only a couple of thousand years ago and that from them have come all the
present people. The matter is mentioned also in Genesis (Gen. 10:32: These
are the clans of Noah's sons, according to their lines of descent, within their
nations. From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood.)
- If there had been only two
persons 100,000 years ago, and the population doubled once every thousand year,
the current population should be 2,535 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. This
is quite an absurd figure compared to the current 6 billion (= 6,000,000,000),
and indicates that people cannot have existed at that time. It indicates that
the beginning of the mankind must be much closer, only a couple of thousand
years in the past.
- The current rate of population growth on the Earth is about 1.7% per year, and
if this same rate had continued for only 1,300 years, it would be enough to
bring about the current number of 6 billion people. This indicates that the
Earth could have been populated quite quickly and tens of thousands of years are
not needed, as claimed.
THE HISTORY OF MANKIND
As comes to the starting point
of the mankind, people have often tried to place it at a point in time much
earlier than the actual starting point. People have spoken about tens and
hundreds of thousands of years and “the prehistoric period” when a man lived on
the Earth. It is believed that science can prove the early existence of man and
that man is a descendant of lower forms of life.
However, the fact is that our knowledge about the history of the mankind extends
only a couple of thousand years to the past. The earliest notes date back only
approximately 5,000 years to the dynasties of Egypt, and there may be also huge
mistakes in them. The margin of error in them can be hundreds of years. (Please
see below: The dynasties of Egypt.)
The oldest found manuscripts do not support the idea of a long history of the
mankind, and the long periods of time are needed only to support another theory,
the theory of evolution. It is also interesting to note that when archaeological
and other findings are used as assistance, the issues mentioned below have
appeared in the world almost at the same time. It is likely that if there had
been people already a million years ago, these things would have appeared
already then, but this is not the case:
- Constructing buildings and
cities (Cf. Gen 4:17: Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and
gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his
son Enoch.)
- Using metals (Cf. Gen 4:22:
Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of
bronze and iron. Tubal-Cain's sister was Naamah.)
- Ceramics
- Ability to write
- Agriculture (Cf. Gen 3:23:So
the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground
from which he had been taken.)
Next, we will study some
quotes referring to the same issue. They show how suddenly civilization appeared
into the world only a couple of thousand years ago. The first statement is by
professor W. F. Libby, the developer of the radiocarbon dating method, who said
in the Science magazine on 3 March 1961 (p. 624) that the verifiable history
reaches only about as far as 5,000 years back in time. He spoke about the
dynasties of Egypt:
Arnold (my co-worker) and I
was first shocked when we discovered that the history only dates 5,000 years
back in time. (...) We had often read about this or that culture or
archaeological site being 20,000 years old. We quite quickly learnt that these
figures and early dates are not accurately known and that the first dynasty of
Egypt is, as a matter of fact, the oldest even somehow confirmed historical
date. (9)
The earliest notes we have of the history of man date only approximately 5,000
years to the past. (The
World Book Encyclopaedia, 1966, volume 6, p. 12)
In the recent excavations, the
most surprising issue has been how suddenly civilization appeared in the world.
This observation is quite at odds with what had been expected. It had been
thought that the older the period in question, the more primitive the excavators
would find it, until all the traces of civilization would disappear and the
primitive man would appear. This has not been the case neither in Babylon nor in
Egypt that is the oldest known human settlements. (10)
Why then did these things
appear so late and almost simultaneously? Is there any reasonable explanation?
The answer is, of course, that there simply were no people on
Earth earlier populating it. Already in the previous chapters we noted how the
population has increased gradually and that, for example, 2,000 years ago (the
age of the Roman empire) there were much less people than now, and in 2000 B.C.
even less than during the Roman era. Actually, if we go backwards only a couple
of thousand years, we will inevitably be faced with the zero point, when there
were no humans on Earth. It is the only reasonable conclusion, if we accept the
late appearance of civilization into the world and the gradual growth of
population.
We should also note that as the settlement initially started
spreading from the Middle East, and as the population grew (Gen 1:28: Be
fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it."),
places like North and South America and Australia were not inhabited until
after the 1700s, when people immigrated there. The fact that the Earth was
filled with people this late, thus, indicates that the starting point of the
mankind cannot be further away in the past than a couple of millennia.
The
dynasties of Egypt
Professor Libby refers to the
dynasties of Egypt (please see above), and when it comes to them, we must note
that even the information about their dating is not necessarily correct. Often,
when dating history a lot of weight has been put on the genealogy of these
rulers.
However, the Egyptians themselves did not write any such genealogies: they have
all been drawn up centuries later by other people (Manethon ca. 285 B.C.).
In addition to this, Herodotos mentioned that at one point, there were at least
twelve kings in Egypt. If this is true, the genealogy of rulers lies on very
uncertain grounds and leads to the fact that we have assumed many rules to have
lived earlier than they actually did. The margin of error in these genealogies
can be centuries.
The uncertainty with these genealogies and how they can include errors of up to
centuries has also been proven on Finnish television in a three-part series
called "Pharaohs and Kings" broadcasted in November and December 1996. The
series shows that the information about the reigns of the Egyptian kings lies on
uncertain grounds and how they may have lived later than is generally thought.
