The main theory opposing the traditional views on the history of mankind is that of Evolution. When, in 1859 Charles Darwin published his book «On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life» (The species is usually defined as the largest group of organisms where two hybrids are capable of reproducing fertile offspring, typically using sexual reproduction) and, in 1871, «The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation of Sex» he met an immediate success. The idea that all living beings, including man, descended from a unique source, through an evolutionary process that favors the natural selection of the best adapted has since then been received as a sort of dogma.
Darwin's ideas were based on the conceptions developed by his master and friend Lyell in the field of geology and on his own interpretation of the differentiations that he could observe between various families of birds during his famous five-year cruise aboard the Beagle between 1831 and 1836. Later on they received the support of scientists from other disciplines such as archeology, biology and astrophysics. Geology and cosmogony now postulate an age of 14 million years for the Universe, of some 4.6 billion year for the Solar system including the Earth; human fossils are reported to have an age of more than 50 000 years and are considered to be part of an evolution chain that links them to the most primitive cells at one end and to modern man at the other. In addition archeology and historical research refuse to see any correlation between the events related in the historical books of the Bible (in particular in the Pentateuch and in the Book of Joshuah) and the historic realities of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. The theory of evolution thus regroups today (if considered in its widest extension) a number of results of observation and hypotheses pertaining to not only geology and biology, but also cosmology and history.
Eventually, so many studies, theses and books were devoted in universities and scientific institutions to defend and develop Darwin's views that evolution is nowadays regarded as “more than a theory” - in other words, as an accurate description of nature.
In spite of the general opinion however, Evolution (in its widest extension) is and remains a hypothetical intellectual construction and, more than that, a construction that has been proven devoid of scientific value in many of its aspects, to the point that, in 1960, French biologist Jean Rostand could describe it as “a fairy tale for adults” of which one should get rid as soon as possible (“Vraiment,il serait temps de renoncer à toute illusion Lamarkienne et d'en finir, une fois pour toutes, avec ce conte de fée pour grandes personnes” Jean Rostand, L'Evolution, Delp. 1960).
In what follows, one will focus on demonstrating the scientific weakness of the supposed scientific justifications of Evolution, taking into account the most recent hypotheses developed in fields such as biology, cosmology, archeology and the dating techniques.
The word “Science” is indissociable from the word “hypothesis”. The aim of science is to present the object that it is interested in as a coherent set. The purpose is to achieve a synthetic view of what has been observed. In 1954, Einstein is reported to have said that the supreme task of the physicist is to establish universal elementary laws from which the whole cosmos can be reconstructed “by pure deduction”. This is going very far. The truth is that the universal elementary laws are not given immediately by observation. They have an hypothetical character and are valid only in the measure that they enable to justify, so to speak, the observed facts.
Besides, the term “Science” applies to three different groups of disciplines:
- that of the experimental sciences, for which hypotheses can be validated or falsified (- i.e. to be proved false, to use the vocabulary of Karl Popper) almost without delay in the laboratory (after a series of manipulations that often are far from being simple);
- those sciences are based upon the observation of phenomena that are not reproducible in the laboratory (this the case of astronomy);
- those sciences that study the past : history, paleontology, historical cosmology etc. , where direct observation is not possible and one has to base one's reasoning upon witnesses of the past : books, memoirs, epigraphy, pottery, fossils, rocks, sedimentary layers etc.
Last but not least, the development of science is a collective endeavor. The number of scientists contributing to the accumulation of knowledge can be very important. It is also a long-term endeavor – taking decades or centuries of observation and reflection – that often takes place in a context of exacerbate and sometimes ferocious competition. Suffice it to mention that Boltzman,, the genial inventor of the Boltzman constant, the author of the definition of entropy, was the target of so many mockeries from the part of his university colleagues that he finished by committing suicide...
Numerous scientists have devoted their best years to exploring nature and trying to explain its mechanisms. It is after years of intense work that they have proposed the hypothetical syntheses to which their name is attached. One does not have the pretension here to reject purely and simply those syntheses that would result in casting doubt on the traditional views of the origin of mankind. The aim pursued is purely to show that such syntheses are not the sole possible. It is also to draw the attention onto the history of the development of such syntheses and the hesitations, the errors and the conflicts that have marked this history. Scientists generally have little historical sense, so that each single generation knows little of the struggles and inner difficulties of the former generation but it is essential to take into account such struggles and difficulties in order to avoid repeating again and again the same mistakes.
The book is divided into three chapters, with a conclusion and a final remark:
Chapter 1 gives the main scientific hypotheses of the Evolution theory (in its widest acception, i.e. with the biological, cosmological and historical arguments supporting it),
Chapter 2 gives the counter-arguments contradicting the Evolution theory,
Chapter 3 proposes a reconstruction of the traditional view of the beginnings of mankind,
A General Conclusion insist that true science is the most efficient manner to fight the evolutionist propaganda.
it is followed by a reflexion addressed to the Catholic public, titled:
Final Remark: Cowardice of the Christian exegete's and the Catholic hierarchy faced with the objections to the veracity of the Bible