The Heat is On for Savanna Chimp Evolution

A paper passed peer review, but it should have been bounced back. The story is that savanna chimpanzees differ from their forest brethren, and they should be studied to learn about human evolution. Mayhaps that is why it passed: because evolution.

Remember, evolution explains everything according to secularists, but it is so flexible, so malleable, it explains nothing. Darwin's acolytes use "selection pressures" to evosplain some of their conjectures, but it is murky. Even so, they use it in discussing these chimps.

Wikimedia Commons / Burgers' Zoo / Mira Meijer (CC BY-SA 4.0)

If those so-called selection pressures still exist, other chimps should be forced to evolve into social(ist) media fact checkers or even something useful. Notice that these pressures are not identified, so that makes it easier to say that they affect chimpanzees on the savanna, but not those that live in the forest. This peer-reviewed paper ignored facts, used the Big Lie of DNA similarities between us and them, worked from presuppositions, and gave both science and logic the smackdown.

Some chimps like it hot. Some like it not. That pretty much sums it up for the science. But out of this fact, some evolutionists have wasted their time by revisiting an old, discredited hypothesis that makes no sense. It hasn’t made sense since Darwin himself suggested it: the idea that climate drove apes out of the trees and out onto savannas where they learned to walk upright, grow big brains and invent rocket science. The only fact for these storytellers is: some chimps like it hot, some like it not. Both forest chimps and savanna chimps live happily in Africa and are not wishing to evolve the ability to hold philosophy classes. If they ever got there, the chimp professors would likely be more astute than the humans who keep perpetuating this Great Savanna Myth.

You can read the rest at "Hot Chimps! No Evolution Here." Also, I would like to point out that this increasingly bad science and deception in the secular science industry show disdain for truth and knowledge. I am convinced that it stems from people rebelling against their Creator, and one reason it's increasing is because actual evidence is against fish-to-fool evolution. I reckon a point of theology applies here: sin affects all areas of an unbeliever, especially the thinking processes. This is called the noetic effects of sin. It's in Reformed doctrines, but others believe it as well. The origins issue is not about evidence, it is a spiritual matter. Otherwise, everyone would be a young-earth creationist based on the overwhelming evidence.