Awake!, March 8, 1949

Download: PDF — Awake!, March 8, 1949

THE MISSION OF THIS JOURNAL

News sources that are abU to keep you awake <o the vital Issues cf our times must be unfettered by censorship and selfish interests. “Awake T* has no fetters. It recognizes facts, faces facts, is free to publish facts. It Is not bound by political ambitions or obligations; it ;s unhampered by advertUera whose toes must not be tread upon; it is unprejudiced by traditional creeds. This journal keeps kself free that it may speak freely to you. But it does not abuse its freedom. It maintains integrity to truth.

"AwakeF* use* the regular new* channels, but is not dependent on them. Its own correspondents are on all continents, tn Scores of nations. From the four comers cf the earth their ancensored, on-the-scencs reports come to you through these columns. This journal’s viewpoint is not narrow, but is international. It is read in many nations, in many languages, by persons of all ages. Through its pages many fields of knowledge pass in review—government, commerce, religion, history, geography, science, social conditions, natural wonders-^^v^y^ jfj coverage is as broad as the earth and os high as the heavens.

"Awake I” pledges itself to righteous principles, to exposing hidden foes and subtle dangers, to championing freedom for a(J; to comforting mourners and strengthening those disheartened by the failures of a delinquent world, reflecting sure hope for the establishment of a right* eous New World.

Get acquainted with "Awake 1“ Keep awake by rea&ing “Awake!”

Prni.nnxD Himtmoxthlt by WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY. fNC,

117 Artime iScrwi Brooklyn 1, y.t V. 8. A.

N. H, Knuri, rmidswl Oiuh" 8i;ncn, Secular*

Five cent® a copy One doVfir a

ftWWfttMMl th'Kld b<t wnt t« Mam 1b jw «*■ try Li ci^pUiair with 'tcui*: ig*, i, fjw-iwy* Mfr injury of n<mittwMtn in tcrtplMl 1L B rcilys f’H« itr L n wr*fi UTct b txaj»4. b, of'* jchr, flutaoipdia

jMtta In dSTertu niHwtof tn b*n MM U )ul r.trrt’tJ.

R»Uci tf <»J16 Um* i fa *■

«t |MBt t»5 1M* BltaripUM 4101m

Oiafafi «f KWmt w+ec vs. pftjer mj

erpeewi HTsctfw within icf Sttul y?ur wld M u mw

lfi®» **i*]y B«i*fr!p:l4tL fate

AhwIm, I.S-, 117 Altai M.. BnJUyt 1. N.T, *1 AtWiHi, 11 fttretftird LL, B B.W. Bn

tKlili 10 Jrwin An . Tw^iu* Muk SI (l»t*4>d 3f f,Ti*ro 7>tT4'<, Utxftj. F I J*

SMth IfrMt, 093 BmU» Qip fe

EmirM M efua mil* n SroMtyw. N. T,r Ad tf Kmc* fl, 1879. (J, |, A.

CONTENTS

Missing IJuks Still Missing

Darwir Shuns canuirek's Nonsense

Geoiogv Improves Evolution

f‘The Earth I? a Liar!’'

EvoJucjou's Link Between Mac and Ape 8 More Missing than Links

Evolution Is a Sinking Ship

Geology Founded on Involution

Qu^t for Beamy

Black-out for Pain

Different Types cf Pain-Killers

Sleeping Through the "Biack-out”

Eeiigiouj; Delinquency

Venezuela^ BlitztLrieg Coup

The A^tny Tak€S Qr?r

Converting Christians to Catholicism

Wild Life Tries City Lafe

Belgium Changed

by Popular Demand

The Nobel Prizes

"Thy Word Is T>uth”

Baptiem or Immersion

Tbs Farce of Freedom in Spain

Watching the World

17 18

19 SO

21 24

Brooklyn, N. YM March 8* 1949

Voluma XXX

Number 8

MISSING LINKS STILL MISSING

Articles In the two preceding luuet presented facta that proved the evolution theory to be old'faehloned, that It orlg’noted In heathen religion and mythology and ancient Greek philosophy, that it* euppoeed proofs of comparative anatomy, blood teeta, embryology and vestigial organs ora wanting in honest weight. Even evolution's star witness, geology, was found to backfire and. Instead of proving evolution, proved the unchangeabienet* of species. This article continues the case, croas-examines geology to discover It an Incompetent witness for evolution, and thence calle to the witness stand some of evolution's famous "missing links’’. They are exposed as guHty of perjury, forced by their finders Jto be false witnesses. But most amazing, ^thousands upon thousands of the missing llpko needed to complete evolution’s chain of evidence are still missing.

WHEN evolutionists, speak of the missing link, as though there were only one link missing, they are being coy. There are untold thousands of links needed to connect modern man with a slimy mud puddle of millions of years ago. They cannot forge a single link to connect any two of the thousands pf natural species. More embarrassing to them, they cannot even produce a starting point for their evolutionary chain reaction.

Ancient advocates of evolution thought they had the answer. They taught spontaneous generation. Aristotle, for instance, believed that fleas, worms, mice, dogs and other lower forms of animal life sprung up spontaneously from moist “Mother Earth”. Van Helmont, renowned alchemist physician during the reign of Louis XIV, wrote: “The smells which arise from the bottom of morasses produce frogs, slugs, leeches, grasses and other things.” When Sir Thomas Browne doubted spontaneous generation, another scientist of that day berated his unorthodoxy: “To question this is to question reason, sense, and experience.” But this folly that life was generated in putrefying matter was exploded in 1668 by Redi, an Italian, who discovered that maggots appeared in meat only after flies had deposited their eggs in it.

When the microscope revealed the existence of bacteria (1683) the evolutionists insisted that'it was the microscopic organisms that spontaneously generated from inanimate matter, to give life and evolution a start. But Pasteur, in 1846, proved that the bacteria did not originate themselves out of dead matter but came from other bacteria already existing there.

Then some starry-eyed evolutionists came forward with the wise opinion that the first bit of life came to earth from another planet, transported on a bit of star dust This fantasy only pushes the problem farther away, and means that man and all other life evolving from this star-dust passenger are “out of this world”. Ernest Haeckel stubbornly championed spontaneous generation.

Many evolutionists, like Darwin, acknowledge their failure to account for the beginning. Darwin said: “I imagine

that probably all organic beings which ever lived on this earth descended from some primitive form which was first called into life by the Creator/’ To admit one or a few creations is to admit the possibility of thousands. Hence the majority of evolutionists simply avoid the question of how life began. They cannot connect the inanimate with the animate. The very vital first link of their evolution chain is a missing link. They are as futile and ridiculous as a contractor that would try to skip the first floor and start to build a hundred-story skyscraper from the second floor up.

Evolutionists Explain Evolution

But granting evolutionists the starting point they cannot explain, how did the one-celled beginning evolve to manhood!

Several explanations have been given, and generally discarded. More than a century ago the French evolutionist Lamarck theorized on the “how" of evolution, In different environments and by different activity the body of creatures acquired new characteristics, and Lamarck said these acquired characteristics were passed op to offspring. To illustrate, he explained how the giraffe got its long neck. Its ancestors had short necks, grazed on the ground. A drought came, the grass went, the giraffe ancestors reached to the trees for fodder, and stretched their necks. Each giraffe generation acquired longer necks, till they reached present proportions. Sounds like an Uncle Kemus tale. The drought must have lasted for millions of years’, for evolution takes its time. Why other grazing animals did not acquire long necks or starve is beneath Lamarck’s notice.

The fallacy of Lamarck’s theory is that acquired characteristics are not inherited by offspring. One evolutionist, Weismann, chopped the tails off mice for many generations, but the last had tails as long as the first. He learned that when the embryo was still in early stages of development the germ cells were set aside, thereafter, all. through life retained their original qualities, and, since out of these germ cells come all future generations, Weismann learned that inherited factors are fixed at this early stage. Hence Professor Kellogg, of Stanford University, once confessed concerning the inheritance of acquired characteristics, it "‘unfortunately does not seem to happen”. Professor Conklin, of Princeton University, said; “The inheritance of acquired characters is inconceivable.” Today most evolutionists laugh at La* march’s theory. They have newer jokes.

Darwin Shuns Lamarck’s Nonsense

Charles Darwin followed Lamarck with an explanation of his own, and said: “Heaven forfend me from Lamarck’s nonsense " Darwin noticed variations in offspring from the same parent, in size, shape, color. He also noted the struggle for existence. In this struggle, he said, the helpful variations’survived, the useless or less helpful ones perished. This is the basis for his theory of natural selection through survival of the fittest. Through a continuous selection of good variations evolution proceeded upward, said Darwin.

Variation of characteristics already present is one thing, but to evolve an organ entirely new is certainly more than Darwin’s slight variations. As Professor Lock, of Cambridge, said: “Selection, whether natural or artificial, can have no power in creating anything new." Hugo de Vries said: “Natural selection my explain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the fittest," Professor Coulter, of the University of Chicago, says: “The most fundamental objection to the theory of natural selection is that it cannot originate characters; it only selects among characters already existing."

Darwin himself said: “Natural selection acts only by. the preservation and accumulation of small inherited modifi-nations.... If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” (Origin of Species, fifth edition, pp. 110,277) How could an eye, an ear, a heart or a lung develop by slight, accumulated modifications! Till complete, it would be useless; if useless, natural selection would not deem it fit to survive. In the rear part of spiders are highly specialized organs for spinning web, without which they could not catch food. WWI, How did they live through the millions of years these organs were evolving! If they gained food in other ways, why make the spinning organs! Natural selection would eliminate the useless, early modifications. If the mammary glands or breasts of animals that nurse their young evolved slowly over thousands or millions of years, how did the young survive during that time! If they were otherwise fed, why did the breasts, useless till complete, persist in developing! And how did sex organs, male'and female, perfect complements of each other, run in a parallel development till of some use millions of years later! How did reproduction take place in the meantime!

Darwin also stated, on page 63 of his Origin of Species: “We may be sure that any variation in the least degree injurious would be rigidly destroyed." When the gills of water dwellers were changing to the lungs of land dwellers, when they were half-gill half-lung, how did the freak survive! When the evolving bird had only a third of a wing, or a half, or two-thirds, and could neither walk nor fly, would not this be injurious, and such modifications be destroyed as unfit to survive? The creature would be far better with a front paw than with something neither paw nor wing. Why would a practical process of evolution preserve a creature with neither wing nor paw nor fin, that could neither fly nor walk nor swim effectively, but could only flounder helplessly, unable to capture its food, prey to any meat-eater passing by! Such a freakish monstrosity could keep alive only in the evolutionist's imagination!

Darwin avoided Lamarck's nonsense, but fell into some of his own. Today most evolutionists cast off Darwin's folly. As John Burroughs wrote in the Atlantic Monthly, issue of August, 1920: “He [Darwin] has been shorn of his theory as completely as Samson was shorn of his locks." Dr. Scott of the British Association for the Advancement of Science put it: “A new generation has grown up that knows not Darwin."

Geology Disproves Evolution

Evolutionists are prone to point to the geological record in the rocks, to paleontology, as their star witness for evolution. But in the preceding issue of Awake! the leading article showed that fossils of living forms supposedly millions of years old were the same as life today. Geology showed only constancy of species, not change. Moreover, fossils of highly developed creatures appear suddenly in the strata of the earth, without simple ancestral forms. The fossil record in the earth's layers begins with what geologists term the Cambrian period, which is supposed to have started 550 million years ago. In layers immediately below these strata containing diversified and highly specialized fossils, there are no signs of life. It indicates a sudden beginning, even for complex living organisms, and not a slow evolution.

The evolutionists seek to duck from under this evidence for creation that disproves evolution by saying the layers underneath have been crumpled and altered, spoiling the fossil record. Some strata have, but many have not, and in these lower strata favorable for fossil formation are seen imprints of raindrops and ripple marks of waves, but no evidences of life. The fossil record testifies that the first bats were true bats, the first whales were true whales, the first birds had perfectly formed feathers, and the first insects were well developed, some monster dragonflies having a wingspan of nearly a yard

Lacomte du Noiiy, internationally known French scientist, in his book Ha-man Destiny, published in 1947 and hailed as brilliant on the theory of evolution, said: “Each group, order, or family seems to be born suddenly and we hardly ever find the forms which link them to the preceding strain. When we discover them they are already completely differentiated. Not only do we find practically no transitional forms, but in general it is impossible to authentically connect a new group with an ancient one.” He admits that reptiles appear suddenly, that they cannot be linked with any terrestrial ancestors, and makes the same admission regarding mammals. About birds he says they have “all the unsatisfactory characteristics of absolute creation0. (Pages 72, 75/79)

“The Earth /s a Liar!”

The geological record does not support evolution. If evolution were true, life throughout the ages would have been drifting over in a continual stream from one form to another, taking millions of years to bridge species after species, and as untold millions of years passed new strata were being formed as fish became four-legged amphibians, which drifted over into reptiles, whose scales became feathers and front feet became wings, while other reptiles and amphibians became mammals, apes and men. Yet as these changing creatures lived and died for hundreds of millions of years and new strata were being deposited, no fossil has been found that shows even one of the millions and trillions of necessary intermediate, transitional forms 1

The reliable earth has preserved in fossil form millions of living creatures of species existing today, and many extinct ones but which are not transitional forms. Why so many fossils of so many different species of life that exist today, but never a fossil of an organ only partially developed! never a fossil of scales changing to feathers or feet into wings! or fish getting hind legs! or snakes sprouting fur! Darwin attempted a feeble answer: “Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graded organic chain; and this perhaps is the most obvious and serious objection which can be. urged against the theory. The explanation lies, however, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record.’" (Origin of Species, vol. 2, p, 49, sixth edition) He accuses his star witness of holding out on him, not coming clean. He blames geology, rot his theory.

Evolutionists and geologists are further embarrassed by sometimes finding older fossil forms in the more recent earth layers and later fossil forms in older strata. When this happens and upsets their “geologic column” the scientists blame the earth, saying it has flipped the layers like a stack of pancakes, despite the fact that these layers are perfectly horizontal and cover thousands of square miles.

Actually, the difficulty lies in the fact that geology is founded upon the evolution theory. The ages of strata are fixed by the supposed age of the fossils in them, and the age of the fossils is fixed according to their place in the scale of evolution. If the fossilized life form is low in the evolutionary process, the earth layer containing it is declared old; if the life form is a late one, the stratum is recent. From the Textbook of Geology, vol. 2, p. 446, by Schuchert and Pirsson, we quote: “The fundamental principle underlying all endeavor to make out the geological past is evolution.” Geologists base their fantastic estimates of the age of earth's layers upon the even more fantastic theory of evolution. And when the earth itself fails to support their carefully but arbitrarily arranged se-quenoG of life as it is supposed to have evolved, according to their theory, they turn around and impeach their own witness, geology, and call the earth a liar.

Before letting geology leave the witness stand, evolutionists would insist that its testimony in the case of the horse be heard. It is considered to be their strongest evidence. They have a series of fossil forms that they arrange to suit their fancy, beginning with a small fivetoed quadruped the size of a fox and ending with the modem horse. Many thousands of progressive links would be needed to show strong circumstantial evidence^ but the evolutionists offer a mere handful of fossils, and have not the slightest evidence of any genetic relationship existing aihong this handful. Dep^ret, an expert on fossil mammals, ridicules these supposed fossil ancestries of the modern horse, calling them “pretended pedigrees”, “deceitful delusions ”

Drowning Men Grabbing at Straws

Because of the impossibility of highly specialized organs developing by accumulation of slight modifications over thousands of years, and because of the absence of transitional forms bridging species in the fossil record, some evolutionists declare the changes came fast and furious, in an orgy of big variations. In 1900 Hugo de Vries found new forms of primrose coming from bis experimental specimens. He concluded they were new species, and said: “New species rose suddenly, spontaneously, by steps, by jumps.” But these “mutations” were merely varieties of the old species. Professor William Bateson said: “We see nbvel forms appearing, but they are no new species . . . that which comes out is no new creation." Bnt other evolutionists, seeking to modify evolution to fit the facts, refuse to give up the sinking ship. Note the following by Austin H. Clark, biologist of the Smithsonian Institution when he wrote it for the New York Times, April 14, 1929:

There is no evidence whatever of the existence of “inissiiig links" between any two of the major groups of animals ... It is well to emphasize the fact that every developmental line has certain gape. In some lines these gaps are large and broad, while in others, as, for instance, in the horses, the gaps are relatively small. But they are always there. They are therefore natural, and not due to a deficiency tn the record.

The same year the February 16 Literary Digest wrote:

Dr. Clark does not discard the theory of evolution ; he modifies it. Instead of evolution by a process of gradual development, he believes it has come about by a series of jumps from one major form of life to another. He expresses his views in The Quarterly Review of Biology, a publication which has a limited circulation in scientific circles. “So far as concerns the major groups of animals,” he says, “the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any one of the major groups arose from any other. Each is a special animal-complex, related more closely to all the rest and appearing, therefore, as a special and distinct creation." According to Dr Clark’s belief, “man appeared in the Pliocene age, just preceding the ice age. He appeared suddenly and in substantially the same form as he is in today. There is not the slightest evidence of his existence before that time. He appeared able to walk, able to think, and able to defend himself" Dr. Clark holds that there are no missing links. “Missing links," he says, “are misinterpretations.”

This brings us to the famous "missing links” to which the modern evolutionists point with pride and say, "There is a half-man, half-ape.” But before examining these "links”, the observation must be made that if evolution is proceeding by big jumps, we should easily see them now. The old theory of slow change could hide behind time and say we did nut live long enough to see the changes; but it was exposed by the fossil record. Now the new theory of big jumps eludes the need for intermediate forms and thus can live with paleontology, hut it falls into the snare of not being observable and cannot hide behind the skirts of time.

And since neither of these theories can live with the laws of heredity discovered by Gregor Mendel, other evolutionists have produced another “straw” to cling to. They say that the original first cell was packed with all the millions and millions of inheritance factors necessary to develop all the living types, colors, shapes, sizes and mentalities of creatures that followed. This means it was the most complicated of- all life, and that its factors split up to produce simpler forms. This fantasy makes the beginning of life all the more miraculous. Easier would it have been for simple man to have been spontaneously generated in some sea slime and thereafter evolve into a complex amoeba!

Evolution’s Link Between Man and Ape

« Object!on may be raised to this subhead. True, most of the modern evolutionists no longer believe man descended from ape, but say hoth evolved from an unknown common ancestor farther down the evolution tree. Why the change! Because “man, apes and half-apes cannot be arranged in a single ascending series of which man is the culmination”, as Mivart reveals in his book Man and Apes. As knowledge increases evolutionists are forced to abandon speculation after speculation, as they have done since Darwin's day; and now they disown the monkey myth so long taught with such cocksure arrogance. Failing to make men of monkeys, they still make monkeys of men.

Moreover, they still persist in inferring man’s relationship to ape. It is the nearest they can come to making their argument by classification stick, namely, the arrangement of skeletons according to resemblance, culminating in man. This method is as foolish as saying that when conditions Were favorable wind blew together some frees and metals and color pigments to form a shingle-roofed doghouse,. nailed together, door cut and roof and sides painted in nicely matching colors. Then, lining up after it bigger doghouses, small shacks, cottages, large houses mansions and castles, the foolish one says the castles evolved from the doghouses, because of the resemblance. And if you object to the analogy because all these items are inanimate, we ask, Would it not be easier for one inanimate object to evolve into another inanimate object than for the inanimate to evolve into animate, as evolution says!

That evolutionists cling to this folly is shown by exhibits, one of which appears at the Museum of Natural History m New York city. It lines up nine skulls, including such famous “missing links” as Pithecanthropus erectus (upstanding ape man), Piltdown man, Heidelberg man, Neanderthal man and Cro-Magnon man. Note the first one is named “ape man”. Now a new find is supposed to fit in after this ape-man, called Australopithecus, meaning “southern ape”. Why do they continue to name their “missing links” as part-ape part-man if they no longer contend man descended from ape! Why do they babble over new finds as half-ape half-man 1 Regardless of scattered objections, the belief is generally prevalent that evolutionists teach that man came,from ape, and some evolutionists still believe it. In The Science of Life, page 419, it is stated that H. G. Wells, G. P. Wells and Julian Huxley assure us concerning man's ancestors: “Four-footed, tailed and hairy it took to the Eocene forests; it grew into lemur, into monkey, into ape; and finally ape turned into man-ape, and man-ape grew to man?*

Fooled by Bones and a Pig

There is no need to detail the discoveries of a tooth here, a leg bone there, and a skull fragment somewhere else, all of which scattered runoisn is Drought together, sworn to belong together, and from which is constructed entire families of hunting ape-men. That is what evolutionists do with the six outstanding fossil types that supposedly prove the evolution of man. Of these six evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith says: “We may say at once that as geological record now stands, we cannot trace modem man backwards to any of these extinct types.” Though seldom publicized, the skulls of modern-type man have been found in many places and are older than these “missing links”. After mentioning this, Keith says: “The majority of anatomists and geologists . . . simply refuse to believe in the authenticity of these discoveries because they run so contrary to our preconceptions.”

This shows that evolutionists will suppress evidence to prove their theory. Another outstanding example is Eugene Dubois' discovery of the Java ape-man. He told the scientific world about his “missing link” in 1894. The thigh bone and teeth seemed to be from man, but the skull seemed to be from ape. Since it was not known then that fossils of men were to be found in Java, the scientists thought they had a part-ape partman. It was twenty-six years later that Dubois confessed that at the same time he discovered his “missing link” he found fossils of human skulls, a big-brained type called Wadjak man.

This, plus the fact that modern-type human skulls older than the six famous “missing links” have been found, plus the fact that similar modern skulls older than the more recently famous “southern ape” are known, brushes these fake links, which are degenerated humans or are similar to the giants found in the land of Canaan when Israel entered, from the scales on which we weigh evolution's evidence. With true men existing before these hazy concoctions by prejudiced evolutionists, these vaunted

“missing links” cannot be links between man and ape, or any other animal.

The assertions of evolutionists cannot be swallowed as scientific truth, as evidenced by the tooth found in Nebraska in 1922. It was the tooth of an ancient man that fitted in with evolution, scientists claimed. In 1925 the American Museum of Natural History declared: “Every suggestion made by scientific skeptics was weighed and i -55 found wanting.” Then in 1928 CjkiSkfr the museum admitted it was a pig’s tooth. Fooled by a pig!

More Missing than Links

This series of articles has shown that evolution is missing in true scientific evidence. It is a theory springing from pagan antiquity. It is taught by men highly esteemed in this world, is supported by the tyranny of “experts and authorities”. Unproved, it is accepted because of the big names that propagate it It is missing a starting point, intermediate links, and final link. The gap separating man an<J ape or any other animal of the evolutionist's choice is the widest of the whole chain, and, though the link should be recent and its trail fresh, the evolutionists cannot track it down or even get its faint scent. The tremendous gap remains, yawning in boredom at the futile efforts of evolutionists to bridge it.

And if they,had barrels and barrels of links, links do not make a connected chain till forged together, just as a pile of bricks do not make a building until assembled by an intelligent creature. None of the required proofs have evolution's ballyhooers been able to produce. They have retreated from one speculation after another, from inheritance of acquired characteristics, from natural selection and survival of the fittest, from slow changes, from fast changes, from proof by classification, comparative anatomy, embryology, geology or paleontology, blood tests, vestigial organs, and some more sensible evolutionists are eyen abandoning the infamous “missing links51

But missing most from the theory is common sense and reason. A wild flood of nonsense spues out on every hand, a deluge of assertions that is an insult to intelligence. A British evolutionist gets his name in the paper by saying future men will be chinless and toothless because of‘the soft foods man is eating. In tile dim past men, or their ancestors, were supposed to be practically chinless. Is evolution going in circles? Or is it the evolutionists? Another spouts that in time man’s foot will become toeless because he wears shoes. Maybe in time he will be born with shoes on, a gift from evolution. Judging by the way. some teachers of evolution avoid thinking, ,.nd the way their thoughtless mouthings are swallowed by unthinking multitudes, men might soon be born brainless.

In a more sinister strain, Julian Huxley urges that man guide evolution in producing supermen. In his book Man in the Modern World he says t “It is now open to man and woman to consummate the sexual function with those they love, but to fulfill the reproductive function with those whom on perhaps quite other grounds they admire.” He would select the human “stallions” and “brood mares” to save the race. “Humanity will gradually destroy itself from within, will decay in its very core and essence, if this slow but relentless process is not checked. . . . We must be able to pick out the genetically inferior stocks with more certainty, and we must set in motion counterforces making for faster reproduction of superior stocks, if we are to reverse or even arrest the trend.” (Pages 58,60) Alas! cannot evolution continue to evolve humanity upward, Mr. Huxley? Has it suddenly quit, after getting us where we are? And does not this program have a familiar ring? Did not Hitler set out to produce a super race, sterilizing undersirables, and overbreeding the “superior stocks”? Would

Huxley breed humans like animals in the stables of the state?

Amazing is the mad delirium of Le-comte du Noiiy, when he makes Christ Jesus a foretaste of evolution's future glories: “He [man] will prove that he is the forerunner of the future race, the ancestor of the spiritually perfect man, of which Christ was, in a sense, the premature example, by emerging victorious from the fight. Thus Christ can be assimilated to one of the intermediary, transitional forms, perhaps a million years in advance of evolution, Who came amongst us to keep us from despair, and to prove to ua that our efforts can and must succeed/' (Hmnan Destiny, p. 117) After that, everyone should agree that

Evolution Is a Sinking Ship

Rats have sense enough to abandon a sinking ship. However, most evolution teachers, like sea captains, choose to go down with the ship, and, unlike sea captains, want everyone else to go down with it also. There are hundreds of statements made by scientists, many of whom are evolutionists, that show their belief that evolution never has been proved and never will be, that neither in nature nor by artificial breeding experiments have new species been produced. Unreliable Julian Huxley claims they have, but the only instances he gives is where a new variety. of poppy was produced from two other poppies, a new variety of ricegrass from other rice-grasses, and a new variety of dog from other dogs.

Actually, the findings of true I L-Lj I sc^eiice Pr(Jve the Bible account of Genesis. Science confirms EMiMH the order of appearance of different types of life as given in Genesis the first chapter. The mathematical odds of Moses' accidentally guessing this order is one chance in millions. If man had been on earth for a million years, as evolution teaches, there would be trillions of inhabitants by now, or the earth would be a veritable boneyard. But for the period from the Noachian flood the world population of a little more than two billion is reasonable. The Genesis account shows the unchangeableness of species, which the fossil record confirms. Geology also shows complex living organisms appearing suddenly, as would be the case in creation. Creation makes possible insects wiser through God-given instinct than monkeys and apes, whereas evolution would demand increasing wisdom as life approached nearer to man*

Man's creation in God's image harmonizes with his ability to, reason, determine right and wrong, manifest conscience, hold dominion over animals; in short, it explains the tremendous gulf between man and animal. It dovetails with science's discovery that men of all races came from one pair originally, that civilization of a high order appears suddenly, that the oldest languages are the most complex, giving no hint of evolving from animal grunts and growls. Huxley notes man's degeneration, which is the opposite of evolution. The Bible report of man’s fall from perfection and subsequent degeneration accounts for it. Science has said man uses but a small percentage of his marvelous brain. Evolution would not have evolved so much unused "gray matter", but perfect man had it for use in the beginning, though degenerate man does not now use it fully.

The Bible account fits so perfectly with the facts of true science; evolution is a misfit on every front. It cannot bridge the gap between the inanimate and animate, between the vegetable and animal, between asexual and sexual, between the large animal groups. It cannot even link two species. It can only assume and assert, speculate and theorize* It cannot prove. Its supporters will not accept the burden of proof, but want it swallowed on their "expert" say-so. And any who do not are ignoramuses, they say. But when their "proofs" are put on the scales the indicator does not move. Nothing will always weigh nothing.

Evolutionists are not on the horns of one dilemma, but on the horns of dozens of dilemmas. Satan has pinned them there. He has revived this ancient theory of pagan antiquity. Why! To deceive men in these "last days". To blind minds to the Creator. To darken foolish hearts. To make a fool of the world, since by embracing evolution the world says there is no Almighty God. True Christians will not swallow Satan’s pill, not even after the apostate clergy of Christendom sugarcoat it and extend it from their pulpits. True Christians will prove all things, and hold fast only to that which is good. They will gaze at the star-studded heavens and contemplate the ^reen earth wifli its teeming life of infinite variety, and marvel andT rejoice at such visible reflections of the invisible Creator’s unlimited wisdom and power* His truth will free them of the pagan myth of evolution. They will take Jehovah God’s advice: "Have nothing to do with godless and silly myths/'—1 Timothy 4: 7, Revised Standard Version.

Qeology Founded on Ftofution

*5? Science News Letter for December 4, 1048, reports: f‘Ancient shark spines, discovered in South America by a University of Cincinnati scientist, have set back the age of some rock formations by at least 100,000,000 years. . . . The shark spines and associated fossils were the first of their type ever to be found in Devonian rocks of the Paleozoic age. Rock formations thought to be 200,000,000 to 250,000,000 years old are now believed to be 350,000,000 to 400,000,000 years old, because of the new discoveries.” Here is recent proof that geology judges, the age of earth’s strata on the basis of the evolution theory. The geologists are guided by the evolutionists. So it goes* The blind lead the blind.

£)uest for Beauty

Want to be beautiful when you visit the Middle East? Then pack plenty of henna for the trip, Iranian men dye their hair, mustaches and beards with henna, in the belief that it not only beautifies but prevents baldness. In Arab countries both men and women henna their fingernails, and rub it on the palms of their hands and soles of their feet to make them tough. From Turkey to Afghanistan the peasants pretty up their horses and donkeys by dabbing henna on their tails, though the primary purpose is to bring good luck. And when heading for Iran, don't pluck your eyebrows, as it is a mark of beauty there to have one long eyebrow extending across the forehead instead of two separated by a hairless space above the nose. Arab women and some men blacken their eyelashes with an antimony paste, and instead of rouging cheeks red many of the ladies tattoo them blue. And take rings, not only for fingers and earn but also for nostrils.

<L In this tumultous world revolts are usually halted by bullets, but it can be done with mirrors. Last November 731 girls in New Jersey poised precariously on the brink of revolution. They subsided only after nine new mirrors were ordered for strategic positions in the East Orange high school* Facilities for teen-age charm and glamor were woefully inadequate, but the predominantly male board of education could not see the need for mirrors, Didn't the girls carry mirrors in their pursesf Why morel The only lady member of the board patiently explained that it took both bands to cope with coiffure and make-up. The squelched males ordered the mirrors, routed from a battlefield strange to them.

<[ Detectives now put the finger on the new look. Shoplifters clasp their loot Ifltween knees and out they shuflle, or conceal it in voluminous sleeves. And in Rumania Communists accuse the new look of being a U. S. imperialist plot to “ensnare women's minds and subdue them from the fight for peace and for liberation from the yoke of capitalism”. Poor new look—a criminal in the West and a subversive in the East!

C Any of you men laughed at the new look? Sober up. Gruesome rumor from London has it that Saville Row designers have a new look for men, called “that physical look”. Shoulders broader, hips slimmer, jackets longer, collars smaller. And horror of horrors, kilts for’evening wear! If that catastrophe strikes to unveil skinny shins and knobby knees, rename it “that honey look”. Women will literally have the last laugh—they’ll die laughing.

C, Do you know why a permanent wave waves hair permanently! Listen to the answer by the originator of the cold permanent wave: “Certain changes take place in the molecular arrangement of the hair structure to cause the fixation of the strain or wave. Owing to the water-absorption capacity of hair, the presence of the water in the waving process materially assists the stretching of the hair and thus facilitates the uneven strain on one side of the strand. With the newer types of cold-wave materials the hair is treated with an alkaline reducing agent which splits the disulphide linkages in the molecules of the keratin Structure of the hair. As the hair strands are under strain when rolled in the curlers, the splitting of the disulphide linkages allows a reorientation of the keratin polypeptide chains; when a suitable wave has thus developed the reduced hair is treated with an oxidizing agent to fix the wave permanently.” And even though you still don’t know the answer, just hearing it is enough to make your hair curl. Incidentally, some may be interested to know that last summer the Foibd and Drug Administration announced that cold permanent waves were safe. After tests on animals had been conducted for two and a half years and consumer complaints had been checked, the bureau was unable to find any indication of serious injury caused by the cold permanent wave treatment. Stories about harm to health and sight were branded unfounded rumors, The bureau did admit, however, that some allergies may exist to certain chemicals used. The bureau added that most of the rumors arose in beauty parlors that were irked by the crimp put in business by home wave sets.

black-out

7>A/N

THEY laid frightened, whimpering

Mrs. Tillie Evans on the rough kit eh’ en table and strapped her down with heavy belts. She was to be operated on for the removal of a diseased ovary. Rolling up his sleeves the surgeon gave last-minute instructions to his burly assistants that stood by, picked up a razorsharp knife, and made a skillful cut with the speed of lightning. A shattering scream split the air. Writhing and twisting with agony poor Tillie shrieked until she fainted, and stopped breathing. The swift-racing fingers of the surgeon never hesitated, but continued to fight against time. Five minutes later he completed the job and sewed up the incision* Almost like a miracle Tillie was revived and lived. Her nerves improved but there were deeper wounds that never healed* The terrific strain had injured her heart, and the lack of oxygen for several minutes, when she stopped breathing under the shock of the knife, permanently damaged the sensitive brain tissues. As a consequence she was mentally dull and forgetful the rest of her life.

Such is the story, as told by Morton M. Hunt in Science Illustrated, of surgery a hundred years ago without anesthetics. In those days most people chose to die of their maladies rather than undergo an operation. Success depended not so much on the surgeon's speed and the assistants' strength as it did on the patient's iron nerves and recuperative powers. How different today I

There are many modern anesthetics which, when used m combination, enable even frail individuals to receive the bene

fits of surgery. For example, a spinal injection benumbs only the area in which the operation is to be performed, without blacking out the mind. Nor does the surgeon need to

rush; he can take all the time needed, three hours or more, to do a thorough job.

How different, these methods, from the old tourniquet that was applied to the carotid arteries on either side of the neck to produce temporary unconsciousness. Modern benumbing methods are also a far cry from the chewing of coca leaves by the Peruvian Incas, the opium and alcohol of a few centuries ago, and the ancient pain-killing juices of the Greeks. Much of the analgesias cooked up by tlxe medieval alchemists was nothing more than “a mixture of mythology and wishful thinking", to quote Hunt.

Sir Humphrey Davy of England first learned ’of the anesthetic properties of nitrous oxide on April 9,1799, but to him it was only a plaything of the laboratory. He called it “laughing gas". In 1818 Faraday learned that ether, chemically called ethyl oxide and obtained from the reaction of ethyl alcohol and sulphuric acid, produced an effect similar to that of nitrous oxide. Godman in 1822, Jack-son in 1833y and Wood and Bache in 1834, all demonstrated the same thing, yet nitrous oxide and ether remained “scientific curiosities" until March 30, 1842, when Dr. C. W. Long of Georgia gave John Venable ether before removing a tumor from his neck.

In 1844 Horace W^lls, himself a dentist, took nitrous oxide and had a friend pull his wisdom tooth. That made news. Then Dr. W. T. G. Morton performed the first public operation under ether before a group of medical skeptics on October 16, 1846. The next year Sir James

Simpson, of Scotland, became the first to use chloroform to alleviate the pain of childbirth. Later on Carter, Lockett and Henderson of Canada added two more anesthetics to the list: ethylene and cyclopropane.

Different Types of Pain-Killers

Anesthetics are classified as local, regional and general, according to the area affected. Local, the simplest type, numbs the external sensory nerves in the immediate area surrounding its application. Regional anesthetics cause loss of pain to larger areas, such as the lower limbs or an arm; whereas general anesthesia completely blots out all mental consciousness and bodily sensation.

Local anesthesia by freezing is widely used. No, the patient is not placed in a refrigerator or set on a cake of ice. Instead, liquid oxygen or ethyl chloride is sprayed on the local area, as, for example, on an infected finger that must be lanced. The; only drawback with this method is the same painful ordeal as exr perienced with frostbite, namely, the thawing out period. It was the doctors of Napoleon's army that first observed that half-frozen soldiers did not suffer to the same degree as warm ones when amputations were made, hut until recently freezing of a whole limb was not thought possible. This is now common practice. No other anesthesia is given, the suffering is very little, and recovery is quick.

Numbing of the nerves is also done with certain drugs. Just when the alkaloid of cocaine was first isolated from the coca leaves, the same coca leaves chewed by the'Inca Indians, is not definite, but it was at some time around 1860. Since then related chemicals, such as novocaine, eucaine, tropacocaine and others, being less toxic, have largely replaced cocaine, which is a very powerful heart depressant.

The nervous system of the human body is like & transcontinental network of telegraph lines, with the individual nerves feeding into main trunk lines that lead to the central nerve channel in the spinal column, which in turn carries the impulses to the brain. If, instead of injecting the anesthetic in a local area, the drug is placed as a nerve-block along one of the main trunk lines, then a much larger region is made senseless. Or, if the injection is put in the spinal fluid, the lower half of the body can be put to sleep without affecting the brain or upper part of the body.

Though Bier in 1898 and Fourneau in 1904 demonstrated the effectiveness of spinal analgesia, it was not widely used until better methods and techniques of application were learned. Nerve-blocks and spinal injections have many advantages. The patient remains conscious, and hence can cough, swallow and move different parts of the body. Nausea, vomiting and thirst are reduced. Their disadvantages include a certain degree of risk of paralysis, severe headaches and limitation. to operations below the second rib. If injected too high in the spinal column they interfere with the breathing. Individuals who are so sentimental and emotional that they frighten easily in the atmosphere of the operating room mijst be given anesthetics that knock them completely out of this conscious world.

Scopolamine and morphine, at one time used to produce “twilight sleep” during childbirth, are now obsolete. “Continuous caudal” injection, a modification of spinal anesthesia, is the latest and most successful method used to ease the pain of delivery. Instead of a large dosage being given at one time, the analgesia is trickled into the spinal fluid at the base of the spine over a period of time.

Knocking Out both Pain and Patient

General anesthesia, where complete muscular relaxation, unconsciousness and the absence of all sense and feeling is obtained, is still the most common type used by the surgeons. It is administered either by inhalation of vaporous gases of ether, chloroform, nitrous oxide, ethylene, cyclopropane, or by oil-ether enemas or rectal injections of tribromo-ethanol, or by hypodermic injections of barbituric acid compounds, such as evi-pal, pernocten or sodium pentothal. Each one of these anesthetics has its particular merits and disadvantages, and each method of application has its use.

Sodium pentothal, outside the hospital, has gained quite a reputation during recent years as “truth serum". But have no fear! You won’t start telling the truth on the operating table, because as a “truth serum” a very weak solution must be given. When sodium pentothal is injected as an anesthetic the patients are told to count, “one, two, tnree . . . ”, and in the majority of cases they pass out somewhere between 10 and 20 counts. Its effectiveness lasts only about twenty minutes, and by itself it is good only for short operations^ For anon cases it is very good, for it causes none of the aftereffects produced by efher. One of its uses, however, is to conquer the fighting patient that fears the operating room or dislikes the smell of ether. Given a shot of sodium pentothal his consciousness and “fight” are blown out like a candle.

Sleeping Through the “Black-out”

With the use of anesthetics there are so many dangers beyond the first stages of drowsiness that the whole subject has become a study of specialists that call themselves anesthesiologists. They take much of the credit for successful operations. These boys that specialize in blacking out pain miist watch the patient’s heartbeat, blood pressure and breathing during the operation. In fact, anesthetics bring one very close to the door of death. After the first stage of semidrowsiness the patient passes through an “excitement” stage into the third stage called surgical sleep. In this stage there are four levels, the first being marked by a complete loss of sensation, and the last by a paralysis of the heart and lungs, where one’s life can be measured out in seconds. At these low levels a patient’s Life is often dangled by a thin thread while the surgeon performs a delicate operation in or near the heart.

Still very much in the exploratory stage, medical science and research is ever groping, ever probing after new and better anesthetics. Not so long ago it was learned that ephedrine, an extract taken from the same plant as the old Chinese drug ma haung, is useful in prolonging the effectiveness of other spinal anesthetics. Dibenamine and tetraethyl ammonium are among the newer nerveblocking agents. Radioactive products of the cyclotron have been used to produce dibromo procaine of anesthesia value. Five years ago it was learned that the poison arrows of the fierce Orinoco Indians of South America quickly paralyzed the victims without killing them. Medical men found the arrows were tipped with a powerful drug called curare, and since then they have been studying its usefulness as a muscle-relaxing anesthetic. Another line of research has. shown that temporary insensibility to feeling is obtained where a stream of ultrasonic high-frequency inaudible sound waves is trained on a local area.

Humanity too can be thankful that the screaming and struggling under the surgeon’s knife are no longer necessary. But Morton Hunt goes too far in praising these pain-killing drugs in the conclusion of his article in Science Illustrated, He talks as rashly as one coming out from under the ether when he says that anesthetics “have already made true on earth the prophecy of Revelation: 'Neither shall there be pain any more? ” What Revelation 21:1-5 is describing are the conditions that will prevail under ths rule of “a new heaven and a new earth”, God’s righteous and perfect Theocratic Kingdom.

Religious Delinquency

Israel Not ^Theocratic ri to be shown to visitors to the Vatican during

< A Religious News Service dispatch of No- V the “holy year” of 1950. It said that visitors

vember 16 reports A. H. Silver, American Z would be aDowed to see the general site of

Zionist leader, as saying; “The more orthodox ri Peter’s tomb, but that the actual spot where may seek to establish again a central religious vj his remains are believed to lie will not be shown,

authority in Israel as in days of old,” but he 7 Why notT.“It is regarded as holy and only a

adds, “Israel will not be a theocratic state.” X pope may see it.” Yet the Roman Catholic Bible students do not need Silver to tell them 4 Church commercializes on its supposed site of that. Jehovah God overturned Israel as a typ- ri Jesus* burial in Jerusalem, and allows hundreds ical Theocracy centuries before Christ, and the v of infidels and Christians alike to inspect it. anti typical restoration foretold for these 'last S However, the item wryly admit s that excavators days” is for spiritual Israel. Certainly the mod- ri found no trace of Peter’s tomb or his reera Israel is not of God’s doing nor is He « mains in Rome, but that under the Vatican they fighting for it in the miraculous ways that He g did And a wealth of pagan idols and statues did for the typical Theocracy in the Promised y and paintings. The Papacy has the same foun-Land. Silver is right when he says, “Israel will (* elation, literally and doctrinally.

not be a theocratic state.” Which is only an- ri

other way of saying it is not fulfilling the v "Last Word in Zeal”

restoration prophecies. Z C At the fortieth anniversary meeting of the

J) Federal Council of Churches the assembly was Never-Never Land w told that churchgoers had become mere specta-

C. C> F. Taft of the Federal Council of Church- $ tors who expect their ministers to “carry the

es lamented that religion would never save the \ ball”. It was declared that the gospel needed no world as long as it remained aloof to the daily 4 defense, only proclamation, and that “must come problems of the rank-and-file layman in the w from the pews as well as the pulpit”. When pew. Already the churches dabble in politics the ministers cany the ball they run the wrong and wallow in commercialism, but Taft wants 5 way, the world’s way, and not the Christian

more secularism in religion. He says: “Senti- \ way. The churches heed better quarterbacks, to

mental wishing for the never-never land does 4 get better teamwork. The Episcopalians sense not solve our problems, though the fact that so ri their weakness, and recommend Bible study in many Christians indulge in it may expl^n why v the homes. “Most .Reverend” T. J. McDonnell, Christians as such don’t stand for more in the auxiliary bishop of the Roman Catholic archsecular world.” But Christ's kingdom for which j) diocese of New York, frets that Catholics do Christians yearn is not a never-never land; it w not know their religion, cannot defend it from will solve our problems, and soon will make ri attack, and cannot expound it to make con-this sordid secular world of greedy religion, \ vert a t He then cited Jehovah’s witnesses as polities and commerce a never-never-again lanA 4 “the last word in zeal for propagating their ri faith”. (New York Titnes, November 15, 1949) “holier than Thou” Popes J The explanation is that Christendom’s clergy

C The religious hypocrites of Israel Jehovah z offer a faith that is a strange mixture of Bible God condemned. Putting on a pious front, they ri and paganism and worldliness, a faith that inbragged to others, “I am holier than thou?’ (4 spires no works, that strengthens for do serv-(Isaiah 65:5) It reminds us of the news re- ri ice. The true Bible faith possessed by Jehovah’s port in the Los Angeles Daily Newt, No vein- xj witnesses fires them to zealous activity. Clergy, ber 22, 1948. It told of the tombs of 16 popes Z blame yourselves, not your congregations.

VENEZUELA’S

NEW governments as well as new looks are the style these days. Not to be outmoded by her South and Central American sisters, Venezuela recently decided to change her style of government. So sudden and perfectly executed was the change that Hitler himself would have gaped in open admiration. Just one short hour, yes, quicker than madame could shed her short skirt and put on the new, the blitzkrieg coup was effected in Venezuela, on Wednesday, November 24 of 1948.

Although sudden, the change was not altogether unexpected. A few days before rumors were flying and an accident occurred which set the people’s nerves on edge more than the revolution itself. Two days before the coup a policeman in the city of Caracas accidentally fired his gun. Consternation broke loose. People scurried in every direction. Iron gratings and doors slammed shut on all the stores. Even the bus service was stopped. Fist fights took place in the streets while the police were working frantically to restore order and assure the people that all was well. Traffic faded from the downtown section, leaving the busy metropolis of Caracas as quiet as a “ghost town”.

But why so jittery over just one gunshot? The answer is that the revolution just three years ago was still fresh in their minds. They well remembered the gun fights in the streets and deadly machine-gunning planes overhead. Many innocent victims lost their lives in the cross fire. Yes, three years from one MARCH 8, 1949

revolution to another is rather a short space of time.

That revolt against the government occurred on the 18th of October of 1945 when President Isaias Medina Angarita was ousted from power. The army, under the leadership of Lt. Colonel Marcos Perez Jimenez, were the ones responsible for the revolution. They established a provisional government under the leadership of Romulo Betancourt. On October 27, 1946, an election was held for a Constituent Assembly and the Action Democrdtica party won by a large margin. December 14,1947, was the date set for the presidential election. Action Democrdtica won with overwhelming odds with their candidate, Romulo Gallegos, an outstanding novelist of Venezuela. A few months later with a big parade and celebration he was inaugurated into office while diplomats were in attendance from many different nations.

This was something new or at least different for the Venezuelan people, and they looked forward to a progressive era with their newly formed democratic government ■ and constitution. A few months passed and rumors began to circulate in the streets: the government was not fulfilling its promises, it was a one-party government with all benefits for the Action Democrdtica party, the people were becoming dissatisfied with the continued high cost of living, and so on. Another important rumor was that certain leaders in the army wanted more voice in the running of the government. Talk of a revolution increased while Action Democrdtica began to lose its power among the people.

On November 17, 1948, army leaders had a long conference with the president asking him to make some changes in ministers and state governors and to give the army four cabinet posts and four governorships. Gallegos did nothing. After further advances were made to Gallegos with no result the army experts decided to remodel or change the style of government. Time magazine of December 6, 1948, states: “The Arrtiy gave Venezuela its first Democratic Government and the Army took it away.”

The Army Takes Over

The public first realized the army was taking over when the radio at 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday the 24th cut short its commercial and the announcer yelled excitedly, “Attention everyone! The army is taking over the government.” Then the radio was silent Almost immediately army tanks bristling with guns raced into the downtown squave, soldiers in full battle dress were sta-tioned at every corner throughout the city of Caracas. Simultaneously every other city in Venezuela was taken over by the army. It was rather, a strange feeling io walk down the street with soldiers pointing the business ends of machine guns, high-powered rifles, or shotguns at your midriff. Citizens were ordered to get on the first bus or taxi and go home. No one argued with them. The radio now under the army warned the people of a six-o'clock curfew, while a violation of it would mean arrest or one might he shot on sight

All rights of the citizens were suspended, theaters closed, no public meetings of any kind were permitted, although the Catholic Church held mass on Sunday morning-.The right to sell and buy liquor was suspended and the bars were closed. During the nine days of prohibition the people of Caracas saved 600,000 bolivares or 20,000 dollars according to the Caracas Journal of December 13,1948. Gunfire broke the silencte the first few nights, disturbing those who slept lightly. November 25, 1948, saw a bit of excitement in Caracas as college students rang the university bell in protest against the new government They were silenced by gunfire from a tank. It is said they shot in the air to frighten the students. Not only did it frighten the students, but everyone else

…