Cognitive Dissonance and Human Origins Storytelling

When telling the tail — I mean, tale — of the progression from primitive to modern humanity, evolutionists hate to give up. The creatures they put forth as our alleged ancestors are built up from fragments, preconceptions, assumptions and a great deal of wishful thinking.

"Go to a museum and learn about evolution". Yeah, sure. A few bone fragments and artists' conceptions mixed in with the speculations of Evolution's High Priests™ and we get a mental image that scientists are brilliant, they really know how evolution happened. But they do not tell the entire story of how they have scant evidence, and that several of the "links" in the parade have been disproven, discredited, reassigned as fully human or fully ape (no, wait a moment, let's un-reassign this one again). Still they continue spinning yarns, ignoring facts. "The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one." It would make far more sense to admit that the evidence refutes evolution and points to the Creator.

Props for human evolution are disappearing, but evolutionists still use them in their storytelling. 

It wasn’t that long ago (at least within the lifetime of many seniors) that Time-Life put out popular books with the iconic ape-to-man lineup. In the hoary old sequence, hairy Neanderthal Man walked behind naked modern man, grunting obeisance to the superior, talking Cro-Magnon (who had a strikingly European look). Far behind were the apes, trying to walk upright. A few transitional forms, drawn with artistic license, filled in the middle. The figures (all male for some reason), walked single file on an undisputed timeline. A few more missing links, and the parade would be complete. So much has changed! 

Two recent popular science articles illustrate the tension between observation and story: props have vanished from under the storyteller’s feet, but he keeps talking.

You can finish reading "The Vanishing Act of Human Evolution".