The Apple Of God's Eye

February 12, 2011

Neanderthal Man DNA Disproves Evolution!

Filed under: Evolution,Science — melchia @ 7:09 am
Tags: , , ,

Editors Comment: Once again, evolution is being shown as an amateurish attempt to discredit God. The following article from the shows that DNA from Neanderthal man is so similar to humans, that the difference is insignificant. Seems Neanderthal man is nothing more than pre-flood humans with a lot more muscle than his modern, soft counterparts.


After years of anticipation, the genetic code of Neanderthal “cavemen” is being decoded. And it is unraveling the theory of evolution. Apparently Neanderthals are a little more closely related to humans than expected. How close? Let’s just say that the man Aunt Thelma married may really be a “Neanderthal” after all.

According to a May 6 Science article, the Neanderthal genome sequencing is nearing completion. It is not complete yet, but what scientists have found so far is astounding: Humans and “Neanderthals” are practically identical at the dna code level.

The researchers used dna captured from the nucleus of cells found in three bone fragments from three different female Neanderthals found in Croatia. The scientists then compared the Neanderthal genome to the human at 14,000 protein coding gene segments that differ between humans and chimpanzees. In doing so, they looked at over 3 billion combinations of four key protein molecules.

What did the scientists find? Simply put: Neanderthals are human. There was virtually no difference between the two codes. The few differences they did find were so slight that researchers say that they are functionally irrelevant—and that if more Neanderthal genomes could be compared there might be no differences at all!

But that is not all the scientists found. The data suggests Neanderthals are as closely related to humans as Chinese are to Germans, or French to Javanese. Furthermore, the genetic material analyzed indicated that Neanderthals and humans interbred and produced offspring that interbred—and regularly.

Uncle Jed’s jutting eyebrow? Chalk that one down to dna passed down from generation to generation.

“Whatever our differences, they’re not in the composition of your building blocks,” reports Wired Science. The “Neanderthal genome shows most humans are cavemen.”

Did you get that? All those supposed pre-man, caveman bones are actually just plain old human skeletons.

It is a startling admission for evolutionists because it throws a monkey wrench into conventional evolutionary theory.

According to Darwinian thought, millions of years ago ancestral monkeys began unwittingly evolving along a path that would eventually produce humans. Along the way, about 400,000 years ago, the first Neanderthal was born. Ancestral humans, however, supposedly continued evolving separately along a divergent evolutionary branch, becoming modern around 40,000 years ago.

According to this theory, Neanderthals and humans lived and coexisted together for tens of thousands of years before the less robust, but smarter humans killed off, or out-competed, the Neanderthals. But because Neanderthal and human ancestors diverged into separate species so long previous, interbreeding would have been impossible, even though, skeletally speaking, scientists admit that Neanderthal frames fall within examples of modern living humans.

This idea that Neanderthals represent an intermediate branch between humans and apes is critical evidence commonly offered by evolutionists to prove that evolution is occurring. Thus, many evolutionists will be loath to accept the recent genetic findings.

Here is the problem: Evolutionists can find lots of monkey bones. And they can find lots of human bones. They just can’t find the half-monkey, half-human bones. This presents a huge problem for them because if man has been evolving from monkeys for millions of years, you would expect to find millions of these intermediary half-monkey, half-man bones.

Neanderthal bones, even though relatively few of them have been found, were held up as the most hopeful proto-human candidate.

The recent DNA evidence grinds this theory to bone bits.

But it was a theory that was becoming thoroughly discredited anyway.

Over the years, as more Neanderthal bones have been dug up, a far different picture from the brutish, ignorant, unhygienic ape-caveman has emerged. Most scientists now admit that Neanderthals walked upright with a posture and gait like humans today. They cared for their families, buried their dead, used many types of tools, and cooked their food. Recent discoveries also show that at least some women carried compacts and used different types of makeup including foundation layers and blush.

The main difference is that Neanderthals are slightly shorter on average, but have larger hands, thicker arm and leg bones and were significantly more muscled. They also had larger skulls, and brains which were approximately 11 percent larger than the typical human, but well within the range found today.

The scientists that now admit that Neanderthals were fully human have reclassified them as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis—which is just the scientific way of saying the bones are a variety of true humans.

So much for the Neanderthal as an ancient monkey-man theory.

But perhaps the most amazing but unreported facet of the Neanderthal story is that if scientists had just looked at the Bible, they would have known that Neanderthals were fully human in the first place.

The Bible describes a race of pre-Flood humans that grew to dominate the cultural landscape before being wiped out.

Genesis 6:4 talks about “giants” in the land before the flood. The English word giants is translated from two original Hebrew words: Rephaim and Nephilim. The Rephaim are mentioned only after the Flood; they were tall men, like Anakim (Deuteronomy 2:11, 20).

As Roy Shultz brings out in Exploring Ancient History, the word giant in Genesis 6:4 comes from the word Nephilim, which means “a feller,” or one who fells a tree because of his unusual strength. The term implies a “tough,” or a bully, an individual of great physical might. In other words, the Nephilim were giants in strength but not in tallness of stature.

The description of the Nephilim of pre-Flood times matches perfectly with the large-boned, exceptionally muscled Neanderthals.

The Bible even indicates how these Nephilim or Neanderthals were killed off.

Prior to the Flood, the Earth became filled with evil and violence. It was a time of intermarrying between the different races that God had created. It was also a time of rapid technological advancement.

The Bible talks about a great leader named Tubalcain. He was the first to work with metal and develop instruments of war (Genesis 4:22). And in those days violence filled the Earth (Genesis 6:11, 13). The Neanderthals were no match for the swords and spears and arrows of Tubalcain’s armies.

According to Shultz, the “violence” that filled the Earth is talking about a great war that took place before the Flood—a war that God allowed because of the degeneration and gross wickedness of the Neanderthals and other humans. This too fits with the archaeological evidence that indicates that many of the Neanderthal sites that have been uncovered show indications that cannibalism was common. Bones found at Neanderthal cave dwellings often show the telltale signs of cut marks and splitting which indicate that the Neanderthal were eating the marrow of the bones. Another Neanderthal site in Germany offers more proof of the violence. Thirty-three skulls were unearthed all huddled together in a circle. Their owner’s heads had been cut off with a stone ax and buried together.

Eventually the violence and degradation became so intense that God decided to destroy all humans except Noah, his three sons and their wives in a worldwide Flood.

Is it fragments of this pre-Flood genetic code that have been transferred down through the ages and generations that scientists are now detecting in people today? Adam and Eve are common ancestors to all humans.

Once again, science proves the Bible correct.

That is certainly good news for Aunt Thelma and Uncle Jed—but not so good for the evolutionists. They will just have to modify their theory again.


  1. A great rebuttal to evolutionists everywhere. Of course they will scoff, but since they can’t account for how they came into being, then, “if the shoe fits…..”

    Comment by Ryan — July 15, 2011 @ 6:56 pm | Reply

  2. With all do respect, I don’t think this disproves evolution at all. Clearly Neanderthals are a type of human. That’s why they are included in the genus “Homo,” i.e., Homo Neanderthalensis or Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis, depending on exactly how close you believed Neanderthals to be to the rest of us.

    The exact relationship between anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals has always been debatable, as is apt to happen in science, and is, in fact, how science progresses: science isn’t static and our understanding does change over time as more data is discovered, analyzed and debated. That’s a strength of the scientific method, not a weakness. It’s why science actually works and moves our understanding forward.

    A long time ago scientists hypothesized that modern humans may have evolved from Neanderthals. They made this supposition on very little evidence and at the time it was probably a reasonable guess to make. However, that time passed a long time ago. More recently, scientists hypothesized that Neanderthals and humans evolved from a common ancestor from which they both diverged at some point in time, and were therefore developing along parallel evolutionary tracks. Imagine a tree to help visualize: Were they two big limbs of a tree shooting out on opposite sides from a central, ancient trunk, or two twigs near each other, diverging from the same branch on the same limb?

    Before DNA testing, some scientists believed Neanderthals were much closer in terms of evolution to modern humans, and may have interbred. The new DNA evidence supports this interpretation, as I understand things. But others believed they were more distant, a separate branch of the human evolutionary tree not so closely related. This theory is not supported by the new findings.

    The DNA evidence discovered recently is very interesting, and helps better clarify the exact relationship between modern humans and neanderthals, but it in no way contradicts the evolutionary perspective.

    Comment by Massachusetts — July 25, 2011 @ 11:48 pm | Reply

    • Why not??? You give no reason!

      Comment by melchia — July 27, 2011 @ 2:37 am | Reply

      • When someone says that something is not a contradiction, you cannot reply “why not?” The burden of proof lies on you. Tell us why it DOES contradict evolution. BTW, this article skips over specifics and minimizes findings to dishonestly simplify an issue and bend it to pre-established beliefs. That is not very scientific, or very christian.

        Comment by JEsse — September 3, 2011 @ 3:56 am | Reply

        • In all honesty, so does your reply. It gives me no reason to dig deeper, especially when the article made some good points which you dismiss offhandedly.

          Comment by melchia — September 4, 2011 @ 1:02 am | Reply

  3. Hi Melchia many thanks for the links page you sent me. The guy who made the above comment quite clearly is not a creationist. I in no way believe in evolution especially where Neanderthal is concerned.

    We have both of us seen Dr Jack Cuozzo’s evidence on this concept of age plus your own ideas thus in conclusion the ideas correrlate. John

    Comment by John Hext-Fremlin — July 30, 2011 @ 12:56 pm | Reply

  4. Hi Melchia what I cannot understand is why people like Gaines Johnson try to “force-fit” Neanderthal Man into the Genesis Gap before Adam.

    I’d indeed be interested to know where these ideas and false concepts come from. Even HLH at some point in the past changed his mind about Neanderthals more or less aggreeing with Gaines Johnson’s concepts (indeed a concept which I absolutely reject as totaly untrue.

    Note also that HLH trys to put the pleistocene Ice Age before Adam which I cannot accept.

    Comment by John Hext-Fremlin — August 6, 2011 @ 2:17 pm | Reply

    • Force fitting is simply another attempt to discredit God and creation and to justify evolution John.

      Can you give me an example where HLH changed his mind about Neanderthals and the time of the Pleistocene Ice Age. I know he went off track at one point, but on this subject, I’m not sure what literature you refer to. Please specify. Thanks.

      Comment by melchia — August 7, 2011 @ 12:07 am | Reply

      • Scientists have no aspirations as discrediting god. They however do have an interest in science. Where evidence points thats where science looks. There is no wishful thinking, there is no dogma. Please don’t project your own methodology on people seriously interested in uncovering truth and making progress.

        Comment by JEsse — September 3, 2011 @ 3:59 am | Reply

        • Please help me understand why your statement flies in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Most scientific literature on the subject of creation either outright ignores a Creator or ridicules the notion.

          Comment by melchia — September 4, 2011 @ 1:00 am | Reply

  5. Yes Melchia I think it was shortly before he died. He gave a speech to the university forum if I recall correctly which is a great petty because he has done a lot of good research although I would sugest he has made some errors in his chronology. For example he dates Samothes in Britain in am 1910 and 2094 BC which when added together gives Usshers date for the creation of Adam at 4004 BC which I aggree with. However I think he made some printing errors in the date for the flood which is after Adam’s creation 1656 yrs and 2348 BC. Thus HLH has printed 2369 BC which is twenty plus yrs off. John

    Comment by Anonymous — August 7, 2011 @ 5:56 pm | Reply

  6. Actually… It proves common descent and how little needs to change to reach speciation. Our DNA is also extremely similar to apes. Does that mean they are humans who chose to hide from the flood in the trees? Don’t be an idiot. You are obviously a very smart person. Lets stop believing in fairy tales.

    Comment by Mohammed — August 17, 2011 @ 5:41 pm | Reply

    • Our DNA is close to that of an ape, yes, but not our thinking process. This simply implies that ONE Creator made us all from common material, yet gave intellect only to man. Assuming a correlation between two species is even more a fairy tale than you attribute to me because you believe in creation by fiat, whereas mine is by a Creator. Let’s keep perspective on the two types of faith. One is blind and unprovable, and it’s not the faith in God.

      Comment by melchia — August 21, 2011 @ 12:31 am | Reply

  7. Lets not muddle the faith… My claims are backed by every facet of science while your’s could never hold up to a peer review. There are many theories on how life originated. One of which, RNA World Theory, has developed some incredible evidence in the last year or so.

    One of us is wrong. Only one can be right. My beliefs are amassing more evidence everyday but who ever is right chance is involved. Either life formed from natural processes as the simplest form of life by chance, OR something complex enough to create life from nothing happened by chance. The numbers are in my favor.

    Comment by Secular Moral Atheist — August 21, 2011 @ 3:48 am | Reply

    • Peer review through atheist scientific standards? There’s a non-biased environment. 🙂

      And not sure how the numbers are in your favor when the Law of Biogenesis states that life arises from pre-existing life, not from nonliving material.

      Comment by melchia — September 4, 2011 @ 1:20 am | Reply

  8. This page is hilarious… can you say we are almost “identical” to Neanderthals, but we are far from that with apes? We are 99.5% the same as Neanderthals and 98% the same as apes………this sounds pretty close if I think about it like you have put it. Unfortunately for you they are pretty far from each other. In that 1/2% or 2% is a whole world of difference. I think you should educate yourself (without bias) and re-write this article.

    Comment by E — August 31, 2011 @ 7:30 pm | Reply

    • Simple, if you read what is said. Skeleton wise AND DNA wise, both humans and supposed Neanderthals match up. However, evolutionists can’t find one single instance of half-monkey, half-human bones. If man has been evolving from monkeys for millions of years, you would expect to find millions of these intermediary half-monkey, half-man bones.

      God made all things, so it makes sense that the raw material of DNA used could be close between animals and man, but the difference lies in the thinking process. Animals cannot think or reason, and cannot evolve the processes to think. You simply won’t admit it.

      Comment by melchia — September 4, 2011 @ 1:31 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: