Paging Nicholas Wade. He’s the New York Times science writer who worships at the altar of Darwinism.
Two years ago, he reported that biologists, led by Svante Paabo of Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, had determined that Neanderthals mated with modern humans.
That “scientific” finding provided a convenient explanation for what happened to humanity’s supposed ancestor: We interbred with them until they disappeared.
Now comes a new study, reported this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that the finding reported by Wade were wrong. There was no mating, no “hybridization,” between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens (us).
The study’s authors, Andrea Manica and Anders Eriksson, scientists with the Evolutionary Ecology Group at Britain’s Cambridge University, say that modern humans have no Neanderthal DNA.
Whatever DNA modern humans and Neanderthals share in common came not from interbreeding, the scientists concluded, but from a common, unknown ancestor (a chimpanzee, maybe?).
That is a stunning scientific turnabout in the prevailing wisdom about human evolution. Yet Wade has yet to weigh in on what it all means.
Are we never to know what happened to Neanderthals? Shall we never discover the “missing link,” proving that man evolved from monkey?
Could the proponents of “intelligent design” actually be right, that man did not begin existence as a simple, one-cell organism in this planet’s primordial ooze, but as the fully-formed creation of Almighty God?
Of course, Wade is not going to concede anything to those of us who dare to question his god, Darwin.
He sneers, “To many biologists and others” – meaning enlightened journalists like Wade himself – “it is a source of amazement and embarrassment that many Americans repudiate Darwin’s theory and that some even espouse counter-theories like creationism or intelligent design.”
“How,” he asks, “can such willful ignorance thrive in today’s seas of knowledge?”
Wade’s attack on evolution doubters, like yours truly, is nothing new for the New York Times.
All the way back in 1906, the “Gray Lady,” as the Times is affectionately known in some quarters, published an editorial supporting a decision by the Bronx Zoo to put an African pygmy named Ota Benga on display in its Monkey House – a putative live exhibit of human evolution..
“We do not quite understand all the emotion which others are expressing in the matter,” the Times harrumphed. “It is absurd to make moan over the imagined humiliation and degradation Benga is suffering. The pygmies … are very low in the human scale.”
The Times was wrong on human evolution then. And its pro-Darwin reporting is no less wrong today.