Dear Gramps,

Why is it a popular theory to say that all of mankind came out of Africa? We know that isn’t true. Even if you discount those that don’t believe the Garden of Eden was on this, the American, continent. Do the ones that push this theory not believe in Adam and Eve?

Karen, from Seeley, Lake Montana

Dear Karen,

Archeological evidence of hominid types is determined by the presence in archeological sites of primitive tools, which indicates a level of intelligence above that of the animals with which we are familiar. The “earliest” such sites are found in Africa. Thus the conclusion has been drawn that man originated on that continent. Such conclusions are 99.44% theory and 0.56% fact. The facts associated with those theories of uniformitarianism, that are the basis of the current theory of evolution, are the existence of fossilized humanoid remains. All else is pure conjecture.

The current theory of evolution holds that the aging processes of the earth, a series of gradual mountain uplift followed by wind and rain erosion, have occurred at essentially a constant rate since the beginning of time.

A reasonable relative time scale can be established for paleontological events by assuming that sites found in lower levels of strata predate those found in higher levels of strata. However, an absolute time scale that dates such sites in millions of years is not only very tenuous, but has been demonstrated to be without foundation. There is only one method that is used in archeology for paleontological dating, and that is the potassium/argon radioactive decay system. Geologists use this method to establish dates for rocks as much as 4 billion years old. It is based on the fact that one of the radioactive isotopes of Potassium–Potassium 40 (K40), decays to the gas Argon as Argon 40 (Ar40). By comparing the proportion of K40 to Ar40 in a sample of volcanic rock, and knowing the decay rate of K40, the date that the rock was formed is determined.

Potassium is one of the most abundant elements in the Earth’s crust (2.4% by mass). One out of every 10,000 Potassium atoms is the radioactive isotope K40. When rocks are heated to the melting point, any Ar40 contained in them is released into the atmosphere. When the rock re-crystallizes it becomes impermeable to gasses again. As the K40 in the rock decays into Ar40, the gas is trapped in the rock.

So when a rock is tested for Ar40, the ratio of Ar40 to K40 would show the time since the rock was molten, not necessarily the time when it was associated with some prehistoric animal found in association with the rock. Unless the animal were killed at the time the rock solidified the Ar40 time clock would show a time earlier than when it was associated with the animal being evaluated. Other serious difficulties exist with this method of dating which appear to make it completely unreliable as a geological time clock. The testing performed on volcanic rocks in Hawaii should be sufficient to exclude this method from further use. Ar40 tests performed on rocks from lava flows in Hawaii known to have occurred in1800 and 1801 were dated by the radioactive potassium-argon method as having occurred 160 million years ago and 2.96 billion years ago! And yet the method is still in use!

Further, the very premise of the theory of evolution, that the earth has aged only by an imperceptively slow and uniform process, is itself untenable. Evidence that the earth has aged by the occurrence of violent catastrophic events, including meteoric impact, violent earthquakes and volcanos and major sudden shifts in the earth’s axis, is overwhelming. We simply have absolutely no method for geological dating beyond the few thousand years that may be timed by radiocarbon dating; and even that method is highly suspect.

So I would assign all prehistoric dates, without exception, to the realm of pure fantasy, in the same fashion that the evolutions assign to fantasy the existence of an intelligent force in shaping the prehistory of the world.

Gramps