Science

What does it say?

Without going into details, the theory of Darwinian evolution, because we are still talking about a theory, says that we derive from monkeys.

The science estimates that about 93% (from recent research) of the DNA of chimpanzees is in common with that of humans. This is indeed the animal that is declared as our ancestor to date, although it should be remembered that Charles Darwin never spoke specifically of chimpanzees but of primates in general.

However, chimpanzee or not, little changes... the evolution of man is practically taken for granted as having occurred from an ape.

Man, says science, would derive from the splitting of the evolutionary tree of an ancestral monkey (never found). One branch would have produced monkeys while another humans.
It all started in Africa but the dating of Homo sapiens was first estimated at 200 thousand years ago but recent studies now push it even further back to 300 thousand years ago.

The evidence for this lineage, according to science, is obvious:

All these "fossil" evidence, their dating, and genetic exams have led scientists to hypothesize that humans derive from monkeys, also reconstructing their entire evolutionary tree.

Before delving into this topic a little, however, we would like to say that these issues are very complicated and would require entire books to be explained properly. They are very often scientific topics that deal with genetics, anthropology, statistics but we will still try to make them accessible to everyone.

Something doesn't add up

Some Doubts

Surely you must have seen the various reconstructions made of those primitive men based solely on those piles of bones, and you have surely realized (or maybe not) that they always draw them similar to monkeys.

The truth is that they are indeed reconstructions. In this regard, it's important to know that through forensic sciences, countless faces and physiognomies can be drawn from the same skull. As for genetics, it's worth noting that body hairiness, for example, is currently not detectable through DNA analysis, although eye and hair color and other small details can be determined, but certainly not facial features or whether the hominid was covered in hair.

It looks like a horror movie!

What paleoanthropologists have not yet understood or categorically refuse to admit is that those few remains found could be anything, from the remains of an old, short, and/or fat man to the remains of a hominid with physical problems or born with genetic mutations (as occurs today from incest) or perhaps of some archaic species of monkey, but in any case should not be taken as a model of an entire population or as the progenitor of an entire generation of hominids because it would be a pure invention hardly worthy of being in museums worldwide!

It would be as if, millions of years from now, they found the remains of someone with, for example, Proteus syndrome or a variant of it (elephant man) and said that we were all like that.

In short, they at all costs want to instill in us the idea that we were ugly, clumsy, and hairy monkeys and that we then "fortunately" evolved into something "better."

Therefore the entire evolutionary construction is leaking on all sides, so much so that the debate is still open between those who consider the found remains of hominids (better hominins) as lateral branches of the human evolutionary tree and those who instead consider them as our close relatives and the evidence says they have been identified in the analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA with a percentage of similarity with our 1-4% DNA but depending on the geographical origin from which it comes. For example, Homo Denisovan DNA shares up to 7% with those today from Melanesia and New Guinea.

So the various hominins could simply be different ethnicities, which is not even taken into consideration today, especially when reconstructing their features.

So, if there is no scientific certainty, why continue to pass it off as such?

Let's go back to Evolutionary Theory

The theory of evolution also states that evolution occurs as a result of chance and necessity.
So Darwin and those who follow him, categorically exclude finalism (purpose) to say that everything happens by chance, considering humans no different from other animal species.

And where do the "ethnic groups" come from?

It's often said that we derive from monkeys, but only with one species of monkey do we have such a high DNA compatibility percentage. So why then does humanity have four distinct "ethnicities" from the perspective of physical-morphological attributes (skin color, height, facial features, hairs, behaviors, etc.)? This is not usually found in nature unless we're talking about different human "species" or "races" and therefore different ancestors.
Today, science explains the existence of ethnicities with an unspecified environmental-genetic-migratory cause.
In short... a coincidence!

Why did only man become aware?

All right, humans and monkeys derive from another species of monkey, probably extinct, for which, however, there is a lack of evidence. But whatever animal was our ancestor, how is it possible that only one evolutionary branch has acquired self-awareness, the "I am"?
Of course... a coincidence!

Just one species?

On a planet with an estimated biodiversity ranging from 4 to 100 million species, of which only 1.5 million are currently known, how is it possible that only one single species has made such a significant evolutionary leap in such a short time compared to all the others that still remain in an animalistic/instinctive state?
Science estimates that the concept of "self" in humans developed in the last 200 thousand years.
What speed... a unique coincidence!

The issue is that many objections could be raised, and they would all receive the same response... by chance! Or the response would be a "perhaps..." or a "most likely..." but this is not science!

This implies that the Darwinian theory and many techniques used to support the theory of human evolution are flawed from all angles, remaining scientifically unproven to this day.
But it's probably best not to know!

Many self-proclaimed science communicators or university professors, for example, identify in phylogenetics the irrefutable evidence that humans derive from monkeys without explaining how the comparison of DNA parts is done, or how the probability of the result is calculated. Those who claim this demonstrate high ignorance because phylogenetics, while being a useful technique to provide clues about belonging to one species or another animal, is still a statistical indication based on initial inputs provided by humans for calculation (Bayesian probability). Moreover, DNA comparison is not and cannot be done on the entire genetic potential of the planet but only on what is currently known. We say very little, indeed, to have certainty!

The compatibility, for example, between humans and bonobos (Pan paniscus), an anthropoid ape belonging to the genus Pan along with the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), was almost 99% in the 1990s, and everyone considered it as proof of our descent from monkeys. What a joy!

But with the continuous technological progress and ongoing genetic research, this percentage has now drastically dropped to 93%, and we are certain it will decrease even further in the coming years. Let's avoid explaining here the entire process through which these results were obtained because only a few people would understand it. Just know that it involves the Y chromosome and "indels," insertions and deletions of genes in DNA.

Unfortunately, science knows very well that it has passed off as true, even teaching it in schools as if it were solid gold, a non-scientific theory, a fairy tale, knowingly lying... or at least we hope they know because otherwise, it would be very serious akin to a belief!

The truth

We Were Created

Don't worry, it's not the tale of Adam and Eve, but it's also not the equally absurd Darwinian idea that everything happens by chance.

Unfortunately for Darwin and all of science, his theory contradicts itself because nothing happens by chance, but everything happens by Chance!

Indeed, Darwin states that when a mutation occurs, which he calls a "transcription error" in the DNA, in a species, only one survives. That could be either the normal one or the mutated one, depending on the law of survival or changes in the surrounding environment that could be the triggering cause.

This, however, is already a contradiction because if we consider that the mutation occurs for a triggering reason, let's call it survival or adaptation, then it no longer happens by chance but for a very specific purpose!

Even when Darwin talks about "natural selection" he implicitly admits that there is a purpose and a selector and therefore where is the randomness? If everything were chaotic and random we firmly believe that life could never have developed or even evolved.

However, this Case (note the capital C) could be called in many ways, but everyone can call it as they please.
Fact is:

the Case has allowed man to survive;
the Case allowed only him to acquire individual consciousness;
the Case wanted one species to become the "master" of this world and reign over all others.

Rather than master, we prefer the term "guardian".

WHAT LUCK!

Perhaps Mr. Darwin, like all of science, do not have a clear grasp of the numbers.
The chances that life would emerge in this world or that millions of species would form, and that only one would become sentient and have the abilities of discernment and creation, are 1 in a trillion of bilion (and that's still an understatement).

So let's say it in scientific terms:

Ci sono 118 elementi in natura ed il nostro corpo è formato più o meno di 50. Quindi ci sono, tanto per dare un numero altamente indicativo, più di 4,859*10³³ possibili combinazioni differenti senza considerare la disposizione degli elementi, i legami chimici, e altri fattori, che portano il calcolo a valori inimmaginabili. Inoltre, la formazione di un essere umano coinvolge processi biologici complessi, tra cui la genetica, che aggiunge un livello significativo di variabilità. In breve per calcolare la probabilità esatta che l’uomo sia diventato quello che è oggi, richiederebbe una comprensione completa di tutti i fattori coinvolti, il che è attualmente impossibile!
Il DNA umano conta più di 3 miliardi di coppie di nucleotidi. Se i nucleotidi sono 4, ci potrebbero essere almeno 6^{3 billion} of possible DNA combinations. Only one of these is man! And the calculation is a basic calculation just to make it clear how much fortune we have had in being who we are.

To be fair we must say that not all solutions are stable solutions! But little changes.

We have just mentioned some "trivial" calculations, but they are scientifically significant examples to understand that it's easier to hit a bingo at the lottery than for our "evolution" to have occurred solely by chance!
The truth is that life did not develop on this planet by chance, and man did not become what he is today due to a simple random genetic "mistake"!

Therefore, we cannot say whether science is stupider in continuing to talk about a random "theory of evolution" from a monkey, with whom we share the 93% DNA with chimpanzees (estimated value) but also the 85% with the mouse, the 72% with the zebrafish and the 25% with a banana... the schools that continue to teach it as a dogma... or the religion that still talks about "faith" without giving answers that it would have but which would undermine its nature and power.

Let's be clear... we are not saying that the process of evolution does not exist or that it cannot be a natural process but that, in its "wild" state it is a highly limited form not only in time but also and above all in possibilities. And this is demonstrable or rather, not scientifically demonstrable.

Countless research laboratories around the world have always sought ways to create life from scratch, or rather, from simple recombination of elements, but they have never achieved any results. We're talking about laboratories not only legal but also, and above all, clandestine ones.
However, it must be said that experiments in biogenetics and artificial selection conducted in laboratories prove nothing because just because something is feasible by humans in a laboratory doesn't mean it can happen spontaneously in nature!!!

So it is simply impossible for man to be a mere product of evolution, even less so if random!

the Identity

Of The Chance

The history of the humanity on this planet begins approximately 700 million years ago when there was a single continent we'll call Pangaea, surrounded by a vast ocean.

Oxygen began to develop and the first protozoa appeared. Over the millennia these first life forms evolved spontaneously to adapt to the constantly changing environment and the first multicellular algae appeared in the seas, then about 600 million years ago the first lower animals such as sponges, jellyfish, corals etc. Millennia pass and around 350 million years ago the first fish appeared protected by robust armor and the emerged lands began to be covered with vegetation and dense forests. The ancestors of insects made their appearance, obviously gigantic.

About 180 million years ago, the first land animals, reptiles, appeared and colonized the entire emerged continent. Everything adapted to the gravity and low vibrational frequency of that time and therefore the size of the reptiles increased and with them the entire surrounding vegetation. Until, around 100 million years ago, the frequency of the planet's matter increased by a good 35%, favoring the appearance of marine animals such as the ancestor of the orca and the dolphin.

The Light Beings, the Elohim, followed this evolution, seeking to identify the most suitable animal with pronounced intellectual qualities to graft onto it individuality, the Spirit: the Ego Sum.

These Cosmic Geneticists from three constellations of the Eagle, the Bull, and the Lion tried to work with the dolphin, but after several attempts, they abandoned the project because the head's structure was not suitable for the graft. They transformed it back and searched elsewhere until they found an aquatic dinosaur, a sensitive and cunning mammal of modest size (6-7 meters) that the ancients passed down with the name of the feathered serpent.

The Cosmic Geniuses began genetically modifying this animal, awaiting its development over time. Once the animal began to lose its aquatic features and acquire, through a chemical-biological transformation, characteristics of a land-dwelling creature as they expected (in their image) with legs, arms, fingers, loss of scales, and an upright posture, they further intervened with adjustments to the coccyx and pituitary gland to stabilize its structure and enable it to better adapt to the planet's new climate.

Genesis 1,26

And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the heavens, the livestock, and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

The Bible indeed quotes the words of God in the plural and not in the singular, precisely because our God (see the revelation on the existence of God) was the leader of those Cosmic Genists who created us in their image and likeness.

Still being an androgynous being, like their fathers, the Cosmic Genists carried out a further intervention on the being to double its sexuality so that the new genetics could be transmitted and improved over time with mating.

And the famous were metaphorically born Adam and Eve (storiella creata dalla chiesa) che ovviamente non erano solo due e che non compirono alcun peccato originale.

At this point, the primate was coupled with the Soul, and thus given the possibility to possess individual intelligence with the subsequent grafting of the Spirit, the eternal and immortal Self.

Thanks to the grafting of the Spirit, man thus passes from a percentage of 4 parts of matter to 3 of matter and 1 of astral. From here begins the evolution and adventure of Homo Sapiens.

From the silver-feathered serpent, similar to the golden one from which man originated, the other primate, the gorilla, originated. Since it was not treated by the Lords of Light with the grafting of the Ego Sum, it developed differently.

Ethnic Groups

From Where?

Around 65 million years ago, the first humans were moved from the safe zone where they had been kept, which is today’s Agrigento, Sicily, to four climatically different areas of the planet where they could multiply and begin their true evolutionary journey as a dominant species.

However, it happened that a planet orbiting between Mars and Jupiter called Mallona, governed by the archangel Lucifer, was destroyed by the greed for power of its inhabitants. The survivors witnessed the terrible explosion of their planet even from Earth (and other planets in the solar system) where they had taken refuge along with the fallen angel Lucifer, who, disobeying his Father, urged them to mate with the terrestrial species to pass on the values of the Mallonian population and thus ruin the creation.

This was what was defined as the "original sin" because, at that time, the women of planet Earth were not yet ready to receive the values of angelic men. But let's set aside this story for now.

Thus, around 5 million years ago, to bring creation back on the right track and transmit positive values to the new man, the Cosmic Geneticists brought to Earth 4 colonies of 4 different races, called Archetypes, to mate with the terrestrial population.

the Red race from the Pleiades:
Varied in stature, corpulent, with a blood-red skin color, it carried a pronounced spiritual genetic makeup;
the Yellow race from Orion:
Varied in stature, corpulent, with a light yellow or green skin color, oval-shaped dark eyes, it carried a pronounced intellectual genetic makeup;
the Black race from Procyon:
Varied in stature, corpulent, with a dark bronze skin color and normal eyes, it carried a pronounced magical informational genetic makeup.
the White race from Alpha Centauri:
Varied in stature, blonde, shapely, with blue eyes, it carried the erotic-creative genetic makeup;

These 4 races were chosen because each had different core values that were intended to be transferred to the new man, who, over millennia and through interbreeding, was supposed to give rise to the terrestrial cosmic man.

And thus, the truth about how the human race on this planet formed is revealed. Of course, this is just a summary of the entire evolutionary process that lasted for millennia but is sufficient to identify who our progenitor was and how the first evolutionary steps of man were made possible and guided.

We have not mentioned the two civilizations for example Lemurian and Atlantean e la loro improvvisa scomparsa assieme ai dinosauri, semplicemente perché non era lo scopo dell’articolo. Potete comunque immaginare che, in un periodo in cui il pianeta Terra stava “crescendo” e quindi con una morfologia instabile, uno dei 3 satelliti chiamato Tir, precipitò sul pianeta facendo quasi estinguere il genere umano.

We know well that this "story" is not for the moment “scientificamente” dimostrabile ma è sicuramente more logical and plausible of Darwin's impossible "by chance" to which science continues to give far too much unmotivated relevance.
Just as Darwin's hypothesis is not demonstrable, this one is not demonstrable but, we repeat, in comparison it is much more logical.

Please note that we are not questioning the laws of evolution che sicuramente esistono e che, per le specie autoctone (nate sul nostro pianeta) sono già programmate dalla nostra Madre Terra e dal Sole che esercitano delle sollecitazioni dall’esterno e dall’interno del pianeta. Noi mettiamo totally up for debate la teoria sulla nascita e successiva spontanea evoluzione dell’uomo con quel qualcosa in più che nessun altro animale ha: the individual Spirit.

As explained before, the reason why we consider our “story” more logical is partly due to mathematics and statistics. It's almost impossible che la nascita della specie umana sia avvenuta per caso ne per un evento fortuito ne per qualche legge che la scienza non ha ancora scoperto ma che ha sotto gli occhi ogni giorno.
Neanche la nascita del primo organismo biologico sul nostro pianeta è casuale perché generata grazie alla “fecondazione” del pianeta tramite una cometa, non certo arrivata casualmente… oltre alla quantità di moto del pianeta che non corrispondeva a quella del Sole creando quindi la vita nelle sue varie manifestazioni, grazie all’attività psichica del sole stesso tramite schemi organizzativi che ancora ci sfuggono.

Quello che scientificamente sappiamo però è che il fotone e quindi la luce, può essere portatrice di informazioni.
According to the world's leading expert, biophysicist Prof. Fritz Albert Popp, i biophotons, particles of light radiated by all living organisms, they instruct and regulate cell growth and regeneration and control all biochemical processes. These topics are still a great mystery to science and therefore best left to those who are still studying them. We have cited them only to make it clear that we are not saying invented things. However, we will talk about light, frequencies and more in other articles.

There are various things that further support the theory of creation. The first is that extraterrestrials, or rather, our Cosmic Brothers, really exist (read article), and they have always been by our side since the beginning.

Another reason lies in the soul. If it is true (read article) that God exists and that the soul exists (read article), then this would explain the uniqueness of the human species and thus its undoubted creation by some higher being.

So yes!
The logic, mathematics, biology, physics, and historical testimonies should lead to a creationist cause, rather than a mathematically and biologically impossible, as well as unique and purely random, evolutionary cause!
There is also logic in the fact that the most "intelligent" animals we have on the planet are precisely the monkeys and dolphins, and it is understandable how, in certain tribal cultures, shamans say that man is the dream of the dolphin... we would add, also of the monkey!

The fact that the DNA of some species of monkeys is so similar to ours is also logical, now that we know the truth.
The two marine dinosaurs from which humans and monkeys derive, the golden-feathered serpent and the silver-feathered one, were already similar even if we do not know their real differences.

Domestic partnership

Dinosaurs and Humans

At this point it is necessary to deal with a topic always denied by the entire scientific community because, if it were true and proven, the entire farce on the theory of human evolution which has allowed scientists, researchers and their lackeys to fill their mouths with falsehoods would collapse. that they themselves know well not to stand.

The issue in question is the temporal coexistence between humans and dinosaurs.

There was a long period in which man, during his first evolutionary steps, coexisted with dinosaurs. Without this premise our revelation would make no sense both from a temporal and logical point of view.

So is there any evidence that man has coexisted with these enormous "reptiles"?

Finding concrete evidence of such a remote event, especially after numerous natural catastrophes like the fall of one of our 3 satellites to Earth, I believe is almost impossible, especially considering that no artifact so far has been deemed credible, such as the Ica stones, the Acambaro figurines, or the bas-relief of the temple of Ta Prohm. But we still try, knowing in advance that the arguments discussed will certainly not change the minds of followers of the Darwinian evolutionary faith.

Ica Stones

Discovered by a farmer named Basilio Uschuya in the 1960s in caves and ravines near Ocucaje, a village about 30km south of the city of Ica and not far from the famous Nazca Lines in Peru.
Let's skip the entire story of this farmer and the threats with subsequent imprisonment and requirement to sign a declaration of falsehood of these stones that you can read anywhere on the web.
However, we want to show some details of these stones that few know about and that Basilio surely could not have known, as he knew nothing about dinosaurs except from the inaccurate books of the time.

On those stones, you can appreciate some details about certain dinosaurs verified only in subsequent years thanks to various archaeological discoveries, which highlight the type of dinosaur skin, previously considered similar to that of elephants, on the horns of the triceratops, and on the dinosaur nostrils painted (scratched) on those andesite stones (see images).

The story of these stones, however, is much older, as they were already mentioned in 1535 when Father Simeon, a Jesuit missionary, wrote about seeing the engraved stones of Ica and brought some back home. Moreover, in 1562 and 1571, they are mentioned in some chronicles of Spanish explorers and then in the book "Noticias Historiales" by Pedro Simon of 1626, preserved in the National Library of Paris. This continues until today when, in 2001, similar stones were found in tombs near Nazca.

Therefore the farmer Basilio could not have made them.

Below are just some of the observations made on the stones.

Finds in graves

Many say that we don't know where they come from. Correct, but it's known that some stones, for example, were found in Paracas, Tiahuanaco in a tomb dating between 500 B.C. and the year 1000. There are also more than 30,000 carved figures on over 3,000 stones discovered in southern Peru in 1951 near Toro Muerto, far from the province of Ica. Many of these stones are carved in bas-relief like those held in the Cabrera Museum.

Other details on the stones demonstrate that the drawings were not taken from books of the time.

Dinosaur skin

In fact, in the 1960s it was thought that dinosaur skin was like that of elephants. After the findings of real fossilized dinosaur skin, it was understood that it was more similar to that of reptiles but with large knotty circles which are also fatally depicted in the stones.

Dinosaur legs

The same goes for the paws of dinosaurs which were drawn at the time with 5 toes while, from fossil finds and footprints found, they only had 3 as for the type of dinosaurs depicted in the stones.

Frontal nostrils

Until 2001, the nostrils of dinosaurs were depicted behind the head because it was thought that large dinosaurs were aquatic while studies such as that of Dr. Lawrence Witmer who in 1999, analyzing several dinosaur skulls, discovered that the nostrils were positioned in front of the snout near the mouth... just as depicted in the Ica stones.

Jugular horn

Only recently was it discovered that triceratops had 5 horns, one of which was at the jugular level. Surely whoever drew this figure on the stone knew this. Farmer Basilio certainly couldn't have known this!

We wanted to focus on the Ica stones precisely because, although considered a hoax, we believe there are still conflicting evaluations made over time. Among independent researchers, some claim, based on examinations, that they are authentic and show no signs of modern tool usage, while others assert they have found traces of sandpaper and colored pencils.

Of course, detractors of the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs rely solely on one particular study, the 2002 research by José Antonio Lamich, which supposedly proves their falsity by identifying sandpaper and colored pencil marks on the stones. On the other hand, those who believe in their authenticity draw on other studies conducted in 2007 by various research institutions (including Italian ones) through blind tests, and even by a NASA engineer (Joseph F. Blumrich), who claims the exact opposite and can distinguish between real and fake stones.

Who lies then?

From logic, test dates and the sequence of events we deduce that some stones are obviously fake while others are indisputably real. The fact is that we doubt that 2 ignorant farmers have manufactured more than 50,000 stones of every size and shape since 1500 and therefore there must be something true given that the stones only come from the farmers!!!

During his research in 2007, Dr. Dennis Swift recounts visiting farmer Basilio, who admitted to crafting some stones for tourists with airplanes, flying dinosaurs, and Coca-Cola vending machines. Basilio also mentioned finding other stones in some tombs. These statements were obviously never publicly disclosed by the farmer, as they would have led to immediate arrest. Swift also discovered that Basilio knew nothing about the dinosaurs he drew. He asked Basilio to create a simple stone with a single dinosaur engraved on it, using a design provided by Swift. After a day's work, the result was poor. It was evident that the stone did not meet the standards of authentic stones. As Swift himself said, "the stone was crudely made and very ordinary. Moreover, by simple calculation, the approximately 11,000 stones in Cabrera's collection would have required over 31,250 days of work for the two poor farmers to earn just a few pennies. Unthinkable, don't you agree?

Another important point is that it was never specified which stones underwent these examinations and yielded these results. It's evident that the tests were conducted on different artifacts. Therefore, in light of all this information, logic suggests that we can still consider these artifacts credible. Some self-proclaimed truth disseminators immediately dismiss the topic, citing only what suits them. We believe this is a shame for anyone who indulges in the delusions of these pseudo-scientific disseminators.

Other proof that the stones were not all fabricated comes from other researchers who, in collaboration with the autonomous university of Madrid, digging in the Ocucaje desert found stones identical (not in the drawings obviously) to those in the Cabrera collection.

In short, we could say that the thesis of falsification has now definitively collapsed.

Some claim that species like the triceratops never lived in South America. Such assertions are highly speculative because a fossil indicates where the specimen died, not necessarily where it lived. Furthermore, the absence of fossils of that type in a region is not proof that they never lived there.

We know that paleontological research is constantly evolving and that history has been rewritten several times. We also know well that in some places it is more difficult to carry out paleontological research for various reasons. However, logic tells us that if predators existed in South America, prey would certainly have existed too!

We could write pages and pages about the tests and research done on the authenticity of the famous Ica stones but for the moment, having collected enough evidence, we will stop here.

New Evidence

In July 2000, archaeologist Alvis Delk of Stephenville, Texas discovered a rock on which a dinosaur footprint had been left and, when he cleaned it to sell it in 2008, he discovered that under the dried clay there was another footprint, not of a dinosaur but of a human foot!

This finding by the amateur archaeologist is incredibly important because, unlike many other artifacts where human prints are found on top of dinosaur prints, this one shows that the dinosaur walked over the human print, demonstrating that the two creatures coexisted in the same period. As usual, this discovery is little known, but it has been studied and verified through Spiral CT and two-dimensional X-ray scans.

As always with this type of evidence, some have already expressed opinions of falsity regarding this discovery without ever having seen or studied it. However, the same could be said for every single fossil discovery. Additionally, the dating of various artifacts, such as dinosaur fossils, is based on stratigraphy, which is in many cases incorrect.

Biological material

Few know that in 2007, biological material (blood cells) was found in the bones of an 80-million-year-old dinosaur fossil, which is impossible because tissues and blood cells degrade very rapidly and certainly cannot last for millions of years. These findings naturally raise questions about the accuracy of fossil dating and the declared impossibility of humans and dinosaurs coexisting before their nearly total extinction and subsequent genetic modification to reduce their size.

We can be sure that there will be other discoveries in the future, although it is very difficult, if not impossible, to find evidence of humans and dinosaurs coexisting because we are talking about events that occurred millions of years ago when the Earth was ravaged by some catastrophic events, of which we have only found sporadic evidence.

Conclusions and further ideas

As mentioned earlier, we have omitted the two vanished civilizations, Atlantis and Lemuria, which, if considered to have truly existed, would demonstrate that humanity on this planet is much, much older than what science continues erroneously to claim.

Recent research, such as that conducted by anthropologist Aida Gomez-Robles from University College London, based on the study of teeth found in the Sima de los Huesos cave in Spain, has highlighted a greater temporal distance between Homo sapiens and our Neanderthal cousins. In fact, the timeframe has shifted from 300-500 thousand years ago to at least 800 thousand years ago. A significant leap indeed!

Let's also skip discussing the various findings that occasionally surface regarding the famous ancestral monkey or proto-monkey. Already, the Pierolapithecus catalaunicus, whose remains were discovered in December 2022 in Catalonia, and where it is hypothesized to have lived 13 million years ago, is causing debate precisely because of the place where it was found, which heavily shakes the hypothesis that it could be the progenitor of monkeys and which, in any case, is always a monkey. Not to mention IDA, the fossil of a young female monkey discovered in 1983 in a mine in Germany and brought to the headlines only 20 years later because it was considered the missing link in evolution between monkey and human, but it was later found to be an ancestor from 47 million years ago of a lemur from modern-day Madagascar, which it closely resembles. In short, instead of finding evidence of the evolution of monkeys into humans, the exact opposite is found, suggesting that monkeys have always remained monkeys, even if they migrated elsewhere, and therefore have never evolved into something much different from what they are today. But it's better not to spread it around!!!

Anyway, let's stop here. We could indeed delve deeper into demonstrating that humans are not the result of chance by discussing the morphological and reproductive characteristics of humans compared to other animals, or the uniqueness of bipedalism on this planet, or the famous non-coding DNA termed "junk DNA" back in 1972 by Japanese geneticist and evolutionary biologist Susumu Ohno... or many other aspects that would prove, for those versed in logic, biology, anthropology, and quantum physics, that humans were created and that this creation was guided during their early evolutionary steps.

Certainly, let's not dwell any longer than necessary. What's important to us is to spread the truth, which has always been within each of us.

Watch the video

Discover more inside our channel.

Did you find answers?

Thanks for your feedback!

Human Evolution

What does it say?

Some Doubts