Michael Charney On the question of biological, especially human origins, Lubenow is not content to merely quote biblical theory. Like a true scholar he researches in depth the literature in the scientific journals, sifting the evidence, searching out the areas open to interpretation.
Michael Charney He does his homework so thoroughly that he makes someone like me who would carry on a dialogue with him also do his homework. He is a pleasure to fence with intellectually.
Bones of Contention p. 7 The human fossil record is strongly supportive of the concept of Special Creation. On the other hand, the fossil evidence is so contrary to human evolution as to effectively falsify the idea that humans evolved.
Bones of Contention p. 7 This book is the fruit of twenty-five years of research. Because its conclusions are different from what is almost universally believed, it is heavily documented from the most recent scientific literature.
Bones of Contention p. 9 It is impossible to deal with the subject of human fossils without also dealing with the subject of the radiometric dating methods... The appendix of this book is a case study of the torutred ten- year attempt to date the famous fossil KNM-ER 1470 discovered in 1972…
Bones of Contention p. 9 This case study clearly reveals that the radiometric dating methods are not independent confirmations of evolution and an old earth… These dating methods are, instead, faithful and obedient servants of evolution.
Bones of Contention p. 178 The facts of the big picture are that first, fossils that are indistinguishable from modern humans can be traced all the way back to 4.5 m.y.a, according to the evolution time scale.
Bones of Contention p. 178 Second, Homo erectus demonstrates a morphological consistency throughout its two-million-year history. The fossil record does not show erectus evolving from something else or evolving into something else.
Bones of Contention p. 178 Third, anatomically modern Homo sapiens, Neandertal, archaic Homo sapiens, and Homo erectus all lived as contemporaries at one time or another.
Bones of Contention p. 179 Fourth, all of the fossils ascribed to the Homo habilis category are contemproary with Homo erectus. This, Homo habilis not only did not evolve into Homo erectus, it could not have evolved into Homo erectus.
Bones of Contention p. 182 David Pilbeam: There is no clear-cut and inexorable pathway from ape to human being.
Bones of Contention p. 182 David Pilbeam on whether man evolved from gibbons, chimp, or orangutans: The fossil record has been elastic enough, the expectations sufficiently robust, to accommodate almost any story.
Bones of Contention p. 182 Mary Leakey on the constructing of evolutionary family trees: …in the present state of our knowledge, I do not believe it is possible to fit the known hominid fossils into a reliable plan.
Bones of Contention p. 182 Robert Martin: So one is forced to conclude that there is no clear-cut scientific picture of human evolution.
Bones of Contention p. 8 The fossil humans with a somewhat different skull shape (morphologically) are actually products of the post-Flood Ice Age. The Ice Age, in turn, is inseperably linked in terms of cause and effect to the world-wide Genesis Flood.
Bones of Contention p. 8 The scientific community, rejecting the Genesis Flood, has been singularly unsuccessful in developing an adequate explanation for the Ice Age.
Luke 17:27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
2 Peter 2:5 if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;
2 Peter 3:6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.