We Are the Children of the Stars (4 page)

One very important fact must be pointed out before we proceed. Though having doubts himself, Darwin decided not to go along with Wallace in the latter's belief that Man represented a departure from the laws of natural selection.
¹²
As Darwin gradually assumed the major credit for his survival-of-the-fittest concept, he also assumed the great burden of attempting to prove to the world that his theory was correct, inviolable, without fault or exception.

This burden inevitably caused Darwin to lose some scientific objectivity. He became a champion instead of a scientist. He championed one of the greatest and most disturbing concepts since the birth of Christ, and he fully appreciated the importance of his role.

Small wonder, then, that he chose to ignore the many ways in which Man himself deviated from the otherwise perfect workings of the great theory. In bypassing the anomaly of Man by providing less than perfect explanations based solely upon his theory, Darwin was able to convince large segments of the scientific community that his theory was, by and large, correct.

But actually, he was not at all at ease with the explanations that he had devised to explain some of Man's deviations from the rules that obviously
did govern all the rest of the animal kingdom.
¹³

For instance, he was at a complete loss to come up with a truly satisfactory answer to the amazing phenomenon of why Man alone is relatively hairless.

Just as it is true that Darwin lost scientific objectivity by assuming the burden of champion, it is also true that Wallace was thereby given the role of using ultimate objectivity. He had nothing to prove to the world and consequently could be, if anything, more objective than before.

So Wallace, the naturalist, was able to analyze the available data more searchingly and dispassionately than Darwin. He was able to take the first hesitant (if unknowing) step toward the concept, rather shocking at first glance, that is being proposed in this book.

Wallace noted some strange facts about Man that caused him to conclude Man was a contrary exception to the classic workings of the laws of Evolution.

In an alarming number of ways, man's great brain and mind, for instance, did not fit into the laws of natural selection. Nowhere in the animal kingdom was there to be found anything like the quality of mathematical or scientific capabilities of the human race. Moreover, nothing could be found in the environment of Man that could, by the inexorable laws of natural selection, produce any sort of genius in any individual.

Wallace put it down in black and white – “Nature never overendows a species beyond the demands of everyday existence.”

Further, Wallace knew that Man had desires and esoteric yearnings that were never observed in the mind or behavior of other animals.

The most revealing is Man's need for religion, a need to feel that he is not alone, but a part of a larger and more important order in the plans of a creator. This order assures Man that he, and he alone, has “connections” – what might be called “cosmic connections” – with God and the lesser gods of the vast universe. There is nothing in human environment that could cause Man, by natural selection, to develop in such a way that a need for religion would be “natural.”

If anything, Man has less need than any other animal to devise religion.

Man is dominant over all other animals. He is king of all he surveys.

Why is it, then, that he feels a need to be
assured
that he was, and is, a part of some much greater scheme of things – all of divine origin?

Wallace knew these things and he also knew that Man had a greater gross brain-weight than any other animal except the dolphin, elephant, and the whale. He felt sure that Man was an exception to the rule that all living things grew from one primal living cell.

Wallace may also have know that Man is the only primate that cries “emotional” tears. A small thing, but still a great barrier when no explanation for this odd and irreconcilable fact could be derived from the principles of natural selection.

He knew, too, that the unbelievably advanced cultures of the ancient Sumerians and Egyptians had sprung up overnight, apparently without cause, certainly without counterpart in the animal or primate world.

Wallace knew that the laws of natural selection could not explain the sudden explosion of those ancient cultures without also insisting that the cultural advance should go
forward
. This had not happened, and Wallace knew that the failure of cultural advance to continue to new heights was of great importance in the story of mankind.

Does Wallace's belief surprise you? Namely, that mankind has not really progressed – except technologically – since earliest civilized times?

Outside of arrogant and egotistic scientists among the establishment leaders of today, many sober scholars and thinkers see undeniable evidence that all the basic rules of ethics, morals, philosophy, social structure, and religion – everything important to mankind as a whole – were laid down long, long ago, starting with the Sumerians around 10,000 B.C.

Peaks of human thought were already reached in B.C. times, particularly in Greece and Rome. And we will see in a later chapter that there is strong evidence for believing that there were more geniuses per capita in ancient times than today. The advent of modern science and technology has not changed or “advanced” the fundamental rules and precepts of human nature and human society, no matter how much we would like to think ourselves “superior” to our ancestors.

Will anybody deny that there is much unrest in the current world, much searching of souls, dissatisfaction, doubt, and uncertainty over what the “meaning” of life is? We are really less secure today than the well-enlightened people of certain B.C. eras. Our vaunted “advancement” is largely illusory, based on pure materialism.

Wallace knew that there was a logical explanation for the cessation of forward movement in human affairs, and that, without doubt, Man was therefore an exception to the otherwise universal law of natural selection and its relentless drive for
improvement
in all creatures.

This great man, freed as he was from the responsibility of proving the Evolution theory to be correct, could dispassionately analyze the available facts.

He came to the inescapable conclusion that Man was not the result of natural selection by itself but was the result of natural selection plus some other
unknown variable.

That unknown variable, which we propose will solve the mysteries that plagued Wallace and even Darwin, is the concept that Man is a hybrid and Earth a colony of starmen.

During the past 500,000 years, Man has particularly given evidence that he is a hybrid of only half-earthly heritage. His tools of shaped stone are the only tools produced deliberately by any animal that lasted through the ages. Wallace knew about these tools and knew they were mute evidence that years ago, somewhere, mankind had undergone some change that forever set him aside from the other animals.

Wallace knew that Man was not the result of Evolution alone, but if he guessed the truth as to the probability of
hybrid
humans, he dared not voice it.

There are many other voices that at times have pointed out the “holes” in the Evolution Theory. Not so much in the case of other creatures, for whom the laws of natural selection and survival of the fittest seem to apply quite well, but most definitely in the case of the human species.

At times, very peculiar fossils of the lower animals are found, associated with ancient human or subhuman bones, as pointed out in an authoritative compendium of anthropology.
¹⁴

In 1924, the Taung Baby (child specimen of
Australopithecus africanus
) was unearthed by anatomist Raymond Dart of Johannesburg, South Africa, and later examined by Robert Broom, a South African anthropologist. Animal fossils were also found among the ape-man child's bones, no less than fifteen different creatures.

But, amazingly,
not one of these extinct animals had been previously known.

Even more mystifying was the discovery the late Louis Leakey and his wife, Mary, noted anthropologists, made in the 1950s at the Olduvai Gorge dig in northern Tanzania. Associated with Australopithecine skeletons were the fossil bones of
several hundred
extinct animals new to paleontology.

The appearance of great groups of unknown fossils, centered around or near subhuman bones, has a peculiar ring to it. Almost as if the starmen were bringing new species from their world and introducing them on Earth. In order to give early Man more game to hunt? Or perhaps the species are mute and startling evidence of certain hybridizing experiments among lower animals that were carried on by starmen biologists. Later, we will give more attention to this distinct possibility.

In a book that attempts to present a sweeping and overall picture of what the cosmos is all about, a question is asked: “Granting the truth of Evolution's quantitative development here on earth, what about Evolution's
qualitative
development – these
periodical appearances of new genera and new species, or even of new varieties in these species so radically different as to cause science,
unable to account for their source
, to call them ‘mutations.’” (Italics added)
¹⁵
The author goes on to state that we know only “half of Evolution” and that “mutations” into unexpected species must come from “someplace beyond earth-life.”

A noted biologist first points out that the elephant or buffalo, when trying to escape a hunter, will cannily go upwind, while the rhino may blunder downwind in panic. He then states: “If Darwin was right – which I do not believe – that only the fittest survive, it is a miracle that this prehistoric idiot [the rhino] exists, unless by fitness Darwin meant only physical fitness, which is absurd.”
¹⁶

The biologist goes on to affirm that he staunchly supports the “whole notion of Evolution” as being a natural process. But: “I could name hundreds [of species] that don't appear to be fit for anything.” He is obliquely referring to the idea of survival of the fittest. He concludes: “Maybe they evolved by natural selection but the point is how have they managed to survive?”

Natural selection and the survival-of-the-fittest concept are both sore points among various evolutionist factions, since they are hard put to account for sudden, strange mutations that thumb their nose at the orderly progressions of classic Evolution.

Biologists today often create their own mutations, among fruit flies and guinea pigs in general – in
laboratories.
Were mutations in the long sweep of Evolution also created in the laboratories of the starmen? And was their most notable mutation
Homo sapiens
, the creature with superior intelligence beyond the scope of natural selection or survival of the fittest as it applied on Earth?

Gunther Rosenburg, scholar and researcher into human origins, states that “Man is a unique animal. He stands out like a sore thumb when comparisons are made with his cousins, the apes. The differences are more numerous than the similarities. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is simply unproven.”

This doubt seems to be shared by other scientists. Vernon L. Gross, a physicist, recently remarked that “Creation and evolutionary theories are not necessarily mutual exclusives. Some of the
scientific data may best be explained by a creation theory, while other data substantiate a process of Evolution.”
¹⁷
Also, we noted before that the California Board of Education decided that the biblical Creation theory of Man's origin would have equal parity with the Evolution Theory. Shades of the Tennessee Scopes trial!

But, obviously, much more enlightened investigation and evaluation went into the decision to demote the Evolution Theory – because it could only lamely explain the origin of Man – and therefore to place it on equal terms alongside the old standby of biblical Creation.

However, this “sharing” of theories to explain a single phenomenon hardly constitutes an advance in solving the mystery and leaves it more unexplained than ever. It means that a single, all-embracing theory remained to be found.

And that single, all-embracing concept, in all its pristine simplicity, is what this book hopes to supply. We might say that, even if Darwin's theory wins out to scientific minds against the vagaries of divine creation, it still cannot compete, we believe, with the sheer logic of Hybrid Man's creation by starmen. In the following chapters, we will try to solidify this
homo hybrid
concept as fully as possible in the
scientific way
.

The need for a new theory to supplant the Evolution Theory (but for Man only,
not animals
) is highly apparent from the following quotes:

An authoritative book on primates candidly admits that “Unfortunately, the early stage of Man's evolutionary progress along his own individual line remain a total mystery.”
¹⁸

Another paleoanthropological work states forthrightly, as follows (italics added):

“
Man is not just another species of animal
. He is the first in the history of the world who at last understands something of his place in it and of the laws that govern his own activities here.”
¹⁹
The voice of an esteemed Soviet anthropologist adds to the chorus: “Some scientists maintain that our planet is not old enough for intelligent beings to have spontaneously developed on it, from the protozoans to the present day species [of man].”
²⁰

Most significant of all is a quotation from a recent book exploring the relationship between mythology and Man's origin:

Man's alleged ascension from anthropoid to human being remains unproven simply because the famed “missing link” is so elusive. Sober scientists have declared that the bones of this ape-human will never be found because they simply do not exist. The “missing link” could have been a shipload of space travelers from another world.
²¹