Bones of modern-looking humans have been found deep in undisturbed rocks that, according to evolution, were formed long before man began to evolve. Examples include the Castenedolo skeletons (a), Reck’s skeleton (b), and possibly others (c). Remains such as the Swanscombe skull, the Steinheim fossil, and the Vertesszöllos fossil present similar problems (d). Evolutionists almost always ignore these remains.
a. Bowden, pp. 78–79.
Frank W. Cousins, Fossil Man
(Imsworth, England: A. E. Norris & Sons Ltd., 1971), pp. 50–52, 82, 83.
W. H. B., “Alleged Discovery of An Ancient Human Skull in California,” American Journal of Science,
Vol. 2, 1866, p. 424.
Edward C. Lain and Robert E. Gentet, “The Case for the Calaveras Skull,” Creation Research Society Quarterly,
Vol. 33, March 1997, pp. 248–256.
For many years, a story circulated that the Calaveras skull, buried 130 feet below ground, was a practical joke. This tidy explanation conveniently overlooks the hundreds of human bones and artifacts (such as spearheads, mortars and pestles, and dozens of bowls made of stone) found in that part of California. These artifacts have been found over the years under undisturbed strata and a layer of basaltic lava that evolutionists would date at 25 million years old—too old to be human. See, for example:
Whitney, pp. 262–264, 266, 274–276.
G. Frederick Wright, Man and the Glacial Period
(New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1897), pp. 294–301.
George F. Becker, “Antiquities from under Tuolumne Table Mountain in California,” Bulletin of the Geological Society of America,
Vol. 2, 20 February 1891, pp. 189–200.
b. Bowden, pp. 78–79.
Cousins and Whitney state that the Calaveras was fossilized. This does not mean that it was pre-flood. Fossilization depends on chemistry much more than time. Cousins, pp. 48-50, 81.
Sir Arthur Keith correctly stated the dilemma evolutionists face with the Castenedolo skeletons: “As the student of prehistoric man reads and studies the records of the ‘Castenedolo’ find, a feeling of incredulity rises within him. He cannot reject the discovery as false without doing an injury to his sense of truth, and he cannot accept it as a fact without shattering his accepted beliefs.”
Arthur Keith, [i]The Antiquity of Man (London: Williams and Norgate, Ltd., 1925), p. 334.
However, after examining the strata above and below the Castenedolo skeletons, and after finding no indication that they were intrusively buried, Keith surprisingly concluded that the enigma must be resolved by an intrusive burial. He justified this by citing the unfossilized condition of the bones. However, these bones were encased in a clay layer. Clay would prevent water from transporting large amounts of dissolved minerals into the bone cells and explain the lack of fossilization. Again, fossilization depends much more on chemistry than age.
c. Bowden, pp. 183–193.
d. Ibid., pp. 79–88.
e. Fix, pp. 98–105.
J. B. Birdsell, Human Evolution
(Chicago: Rand McNally, 1972), pp. 316–318.
[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown