Christian Creationism, Krishna Creationism, and the Origin of the Human Species

book

[The following is an excerpt from The Forbidden Archeologist: The Atlantic Rising Columns of Michael A. Cremo, reprinted with kind permission of the publisher, Torchlight Publishing.]

For a long time, Darwinists assumed that anyone who argued seriously against their theory of human evolution must be a Christian creationist. Perhaps that’s why my book Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race came as such a surprise.

In a review of Forbidden Archaeology published in Geoarchaeology (1994, 9:337-340), Kenneth Feder wrote: “The book … represents something perhaps not seen before; we can fairly call 
it ‘Krishna creationism’ with no disrespect intended. The basic 
premises of the authors are breathtaking…: The prevailing paradigm of human evolution … is wholly untenable. There is what 
amounts to a passive conspiracy (the authors call it a “knowledge 
filter”) to suppress a huge body of data that contradicts our prevailing paradigm … this purported evidence indicates that “beings quite like ourselves have been around as far back as we care to look—in the Pliocene, Miocene, Oligocene, Eocene and beyond.”

Feder concluded, “We all know what happens when we mix a literal interpretation of the Judeo-Christian creation myth with human paleontology; we get scientific creationism. It seems we now know what happens when we mix a literal interpretation of the Hindu myth of creation with human paleontology; we get 
the antievolutionary Krishna creationism of Forbidden Archaeology, where human beings do not evolve and where the fossil evidence for anatomically modern humans dates as far back as the begin
ning of the current manvantara.” Of course, I did not invent that fossil evidence, which does show that humans existed hundreds of millions of years ago.  In reply to Feder, I say: “We all know what happens when we mix a strong belief in Darwinism with Human paleontology. We get a fundamentalist evolutionary account of human origins, in which human beings evolve from apes and the fossil evidence for humans of our type only goes back about 100.000 years.”

Now let’s talk about my relationships with Christian researchers concerned with human evolution. Among them are three 
groups. The first is the Biblical creationists, who believe that God directly created the earth and human beings about 10,000 years ago. These young earth creationists are mostly from conservative Protestant denominations. The second group of Christian researchers is those who believe that God created human beings, but did it by the Darwinian process of evolution. These researchers tend to come from liberal Protestant and mainstream Catholic backgrounds. The third group, are the new Christian academics who belong to the intelligent design movement. They keep their Biblical commitments deliberately vague. To varying degrees, they are against the Darwinian theory.

I have fairly good relationships with young-earth Christian creationists, despite my Vedic spiritual commitments and my old-
earth position. The abridged edition of Forbidden Archeology, titled The Hidden History of the Human Race, got a positive review in Creation Research Society Quarterly (June 1995), the main journal of the young-earth Christian creationists. The author, Peter Line, said, “This book is must reading for anyone interested in human origins.” I have also appeared on Christian creationist radio and television shows. Here’s what I say: “Whether we believe the earth has been here for a few thousand years or a few billion years, humans have been here since the beginning. We did not come from apes, as the Darwinists would like us to believe.”

Sometimes, I get into discussions with young-earth creationists about the geological dating methods. They have to reject all of them as totally useless. But I don’t find that to be a very viable 
position. The dating methods can be checked against the yearly series of tree rings, which go back thousands of years, and the record of yearly snowfalls found in the Arctic and Antarctic ice core drillings, which go back hundreds of thousands of years. On rare occasions, trees can show more than one growth ring per year, or there can sometimes be more than one layer per year in ice cores. But this doesn’t happen very much. The observed tree rings and ice cores this support the accuracy of various chemical and radiometric dating methods.

My own position is that the dating methods give approximately correct dates. By that I mean they could perhaps be off by as much as a factor of 2 obtained by these methods roughly correspond to the ages for the history of life given in the ancient Sanskrit writings of India. According to the Sanskrit writings, the current creation cycle began about 2 billion years. Still, there are many ways for the application of a particular dating method to a particular case to give an incorrect result. For example, the object being dated could contain contaminants that cause the dating method to give an age that is too young or too old. But in general, if the methods are applied properly, they should give roughly correct ages.

As for the Christians who have chosen to make a compromise with Darwinism (God created human beings but He did it by evolution), I see two problems with their position. First of all, they have to give up any literal understanding of their scripture, which says that God directly created humans in his image. Nowhere in the Bible can one find any statements that God made human beings by evolving them from apes. Second, they have tied their theology to an evolutionary picture of human origins that is contradicted by huge amounts of physical evidence, in the form of anatomically modern human bones, footprints, and artifacts millions of years old. Nevertheless, most Catholic and liberal Protestant scholars and scientists have adopted the current Darwinian evolutionary explanation of human origins.

But I’ve managed to change a few minds. A couple of years ago, Dr. Dennis Bonnette, head of the philosophy department at Niagara University, a Catholic institution in New York State, contacted me by email. He was writing a book on human evolution, from the usual Catholic perspective (God created the human beings, but He did it by evolution). But after he read Forbidden Archeology, he changed his mind and began reworking his book. In the new draft, he suggested that in light of the evidence for extreme human antiquity documented in Forbidden Archeology, Christian scholars might once more take seriously the Biblical accounts at the direct creation of human beings by God. Bonnette wrote: “Scholarly research such as that found in Forbidden Archeology, offers reasonable stratigraphic and other evidence that modern human beings predate proposed transitional hominids, such as Homo erectus. This presents probable cause to doubt current human evolutionary theory. … If human beings did not evolve, then Adam 
and Eve did not descend from transitional hominids … (and) 
Adam and Eve’s direct divine creation … becomes credible.” Bonnette’s book, The Origin of the Human Species, which came out last year in a philosophy series from a major European academic publisher, is well worth reading for anyone desiring to learn the ins and outs of various Christian positions on the human evolution question.

As for the intelligent design theorists, such as William Dembski and Michael Behe, I have fairly good relationships with them.  Behe attended my lecture on forbidden archeology at his university in Pennsylvania, and before the lecture, we had dinner together.  He appeared quite interested in the fossil evidence contradicting the Darwinian theory of human evolution.  Phillip Johnson, author of Darwin on Trial, and one of the chief spokespersons of the modern intelligent design movement, wrote a foreword to my book The Hidden History of the Human Race encouraging scien
tists to “examine evidence that was not included in the textbooks and review articles they were given n their college and graduate school classes.”

My relationships with various Christian scholars working on the evolution question are part of a larger strategy. In the world today, we are in the middle of a major renegotiation of our whole picture of reality, the type of renegotiation that takes place only every few centuries. We are moving away from a strictly material and mechanical view of reality and toward a view that incorporates the subtle energies of mind and consciousness. There are many parties to this renegotiation: mainstream scientists, alternative science researchers, religionists, new-agers, and more. As a party to this renegotiation, my policy is to stay in touch with all the other parties, and my relationships with Christian researchers are part of that policy.

Michael Cremo is on the cutting edge of science and culture issues. In the course of a few months time he might be found lecturing at a scientific conference, appearing on a national television show, touring sacred sites in India, or speaking to an alternative science gathering. As he crosses disciplinary and cultural boundaries, he presents to his various audiences a compelling case for negotiating a new consensus on the nature of reality.
He is a member of the History of Science Society, the World Archeological Congress, the Philosophy of Science Association, the European Association of Archaeologists and an associate member of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, specializing in history and philosophy of science.
Besides Forbidden Archeology, he has co-authored The Hidden History of the Human Race with Richard L. Thompson. Other books include Human Devolution, Divine Nature: A Spiritual Perspective on the Environmental Crisis (co-authored with Mukunda Gosvami), and Forbidden Archeology’s Impact: How A Controversial New Book Shocked the Scientific Community and Became an Underground Classic. He is currently writing Forbidden Archeology II.

, , , ,

  • Prometheus

    Where is this so-called evidence of million year old plus foot prints of potential bipedal human forerunners? I’d love to believe in such a possibility… (note the word believe) but there is little evidence and this is largely circumspect. I also believe that Darwinism is largely insufficient itself. The result? Who knows and why does it matter? I only see three factions and each of them holding their nose up at the other. Childish prattle. We should focus on the treatment of other people…. not spurious posturing that is good as a handful of spent sperm after a one on one sesh.

  • Prometheus

    Where is this so-called evidence of million year old plus foot prints of potential bipedal human forerunners? I’d love to believe in such a possibility… (note the word believe) but there is little evidence and this is largely circumspect. I also believe that Darwinism is largely insufficient itself. The result? Who knows and why does it matter? I only see three factions and each of them holding their nose up at the other. Childish prattle. We should focus on the treatment of other people…. not spurious posturing that is good as a handful of spent sperm after a one on one sesh.

  • Prometheus

    Where is this so-called evidence of million year old plus foot prints of potential bipedal human forerunners? I’d love to believe in such a possibility… (note the word believe) but there is little evidence and this is largely circumspect. I also believe that Darwinism is largely insufficient itself. The result? Who knows and why does it matter? I only see three factions and each of them holding their nose up at the other. Childish prattle. We should focus on the treatment of other people…. not spurious posturing that is good as a handful of spent sperm after a one on one sesh.

  • Haystack

    Yes, yes… “Darwinists” conspiring to suppressing mountains of evidence which contracts their paradigm but which happens to agree with the tenets of your religion… Christian creationists have offered nothing but folksy talking points about how peanut butter disproves evolution and paranoid rationalizations for why Ivy League universities aren’t rushing to found departments of Creation Science. This sounds like the same junk, just with Eastern branding.

    This is a pet peeve of mine:

    “We are moving away from a strictly material and mechanical view of reality and toward a view that incorporates the subtle energies of mind and consciousness.”

    If there is an immaterial world that does not obey mechanical laws, then it can’t be described by science or proven by rational argument…so, why the book? If you need to use science/rationality to validate your faith, then you must not be very faithful.

  • Haystack

    Yes, yes… “Darwinists” conspiring to suppressing mountains of evidence which contracts their paradigm but which happens to agree with the tenets of your religion… Christian creationists have offered nothing but folksy talking points about how peanut butter disproves evolution and paranoid rationalizations for why Ivy League universities aren’t rushing to found departments of Creation Science. This sounds like the same junk, just with Eastern branding.

    This is a pet peeve of mine:

    “We are moving away from a strictly material and mechanical view of reality and toward a view that incorporates the subtle energies of mind and consciousness.”

    If there is an immaterial world that does not obey mechanical laws, then it can’t be described by science or proven by rational argument…so, why the book? If you need to use science/rationality to validate your faith, then you must not be very faithful.

  • Haystack

    Yes, yes… “Darwinists” conspiring to suppressing mountains of evidence which contracts their paradigm but which happens to agree with the tenets of your religion… Christian creationists have offered nothing but folksy talking points about how peanut butter disproves evolution and paranoid rationalizations for why Ivy League universities aren’t rushing to found departments of Creation Science. This sounds like the same junk, just with Eastern branding.

    This is a pet peeve of mine:

    “We are moving away from a strictly material and mechanical view of reality and toward a view that incorporates the subtle energies of mind and consciousness.”

    If there is an immaterial world that does not obey mechanical laws, then it can’t be described by science or proven by rational argument…so, why the book? If you need to use science/rationality to validate your faith, then you must not be very faithful.

  • 5by5

    Interestingly, speaking of eastern faith traditions, Buddhism had a “creation myth” too.

    It was basically a thought experiment to explain what they observed in nature long before they had the scientific method, physics, biology, and full-on astronomy to work with. But the second Buddhists DID have the facts about the origins of man and the movements of the planets, the creation myth got tossed and is just regarded as nice poetry, but nothing you would try to bend the science to.Ultimately, Buddhists are deeply pragmatic. If it does not reduce suffering, they have little interest in it. They neither care who has the correct answer or but what means they obtained it — there is no God higher than truth (as – ironically – Gandhi would say).

  • Anonymous

    Interestingly, speaking of eastern faith traditions, Buddhism had a “creation myth” too.

    It was basically a thought experiment to explain what they observed in nature long before they had the scientific method, physics, biology, and full-on astronomy to work with. But the second Buddhists DID have the facts about the origins of man and the movements of the planets, the creation myth got tossed and is just regarded as nice poetry, but nothing you would try to bend the science to.Ultimately, Buddhists are deeply pragmatic. If it does not reduce suffering, they have little interest in it. They neither care who has the correct answer or but what means they obtained it — there is no God higher than truth (as – ironically – Gandhi would say).

  • Jorg

    LOL!

  • Jorg

    LOL!

  • rtb61

    First up any ancient technology found on the planet does not have to be human and secondly http://www.badarchaeology.net/data/ooparts/castenedolo.php. A more modern grave (50,000 thousand years old) cut into ancient rock strata (millions of years old) do not make the bones millions of years old.
    Of course evolution is driven by the elimination of those less able to breed and by catastrophic evolution where large areas of the biosphere are eliminated via catastrophic events, both driving and enabling mutations to survive in low competition environments.
    Intelligence is of course driven by regular extreme variability in climatic conditions where intelligence is more readily able to adapt to changed conditions than evolution can biological remodel a species to suit the new environment, so in earth’s case regular ice ages over the last two million years.
    From an alien perspective of course, start clusters with interacting oort clouds would be the most likely source of intelligent species (frequent impacts leading to continually varying climate). Further intellectual growth driven by the ability to limit those same impacts.

  • Anonymous

    First up any ancient technology found on the planet does not have to be human and secondly http://www.badarchaeology.net/data/ooparts/castenedolo.php. A more modern grave (50,000 thousand years old) cut into ancient rock strata (millions of years old) do not make the bones millions of years old.
    Of course evolution is driven by the elimination of those less able to breed and by catastrophic evolution where large areas of the biosphere are eliminated via catastrophic events, both driving and enabling mutations to survive in low competition environments.
    Intelligence is of course driven by regular extreme variability in climatic conditions where intelligence is more readily able to adapt to changed conditions than evolution can biological remodel a species to suit the new environment, so in earth’s case regular ice ages over the last two million years.
    From an alien perspective of course, start clusters with interacting oort clouds would be the most likely source of intelligent species (frequent impacts leading to continually varying climate). Further intellectual growth driven by the ability to limit those same impacts.

  • FH

    Real science, backed by archeological findings, says that humans in our current form (Homo sapiens sapiens) have existed for 100-200000 years. Before that there existed Homo erectus, Homo Habilis, Australopitecus africanus and many other “beings quite like us”, which todays humans evolved from. The older the fossiles are, the more ape-like they look. Though if I remember correctly, scientist currently believe that humans and todays apes evolved form a common ancestor, not that we evolved from something looking exactly like a modern ape.

  • FH

    Real science, backed by archeological findings, says that humans in our current form (Homo sapiens sapiens) have existed for 100-200000 years. Before that there existed Homo erectus, Homo Habilis, Australopitecus africanus and many other “beings quite like us”, which todays humans evolved from. The older the fossiles are, the more ape-like they look. Though if I remember correctly, scientist currently believe that humans and todays apes evolved form a common ancestor, not that we evolved from something looking exactly like a modern ape.

  • FH

    Real science, backed by archeological findings, says that humans in our current form (Homo sapiens sapiens) have existed for 100-200000 years. Before that there existed Homo erectus, Homo Habilis, Australopitecus africanus and many other “beings quite like us”, which todays humans evolved from. The older the fossiles are, the more ape-like they look. Though if I remember correctly, scientist currently believe that humans and todays apes evolved form a common ancestor, not that we evolved from something looking exactly like a modern ape.

  • Anonymous

    Like a ludibrious child, I prefer the adventurous uncertainty. Frankly Mr. and Mrs. Know-it-all are to boring for company. Those who insist on knowing truth, are most in it for the money anyway. So I stick to the Marshmallow Party.. ;) .

  • gondolfin

    Like a ludibrious child, I prefer the adventurous uncertainty. Frankly Mr. and Mrs. Know-it-all are to boring for company. Those who insist on knowing truth, are most in it for the money anyway. So I stick to the Marshmallow Party.. ;) .

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37525109 Jay Jackson

    People who doubt evolution do not understand science. It’s all fine and good to read some silly book “debunking darwinism,” but if you haven’t spent any time learning the official science, you’re in no position to judge it false. Creationism is absurd no matter which absurd religious sect it comes from.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37525109 Jay Jackson

    People who doubt evolution do not understand science. It’s all fine and good to read some silly book “debunking darwinism,” but if you haven’t spent any time learning the official science, you’re in no position to judge it false. Creationism is absurd no matter which absurd religious sect it comes from.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I’ve read both Hidden History and Forbidden Archeology…not because I agree with them, but because the topic is generally fascinating to me and I take in as much as I can from as many different angles as possible.

    Let me only say that while I absolutely believe that there are timeline inconsistencies in our collective beliefs about the origins of man and civilization (ie. homo sapiens sapiens…as we know ourselves now…supposedly took 90,000 years to figure out more than fire and sharp sticks and rocks…so all city structures predating a few thousand years BC are merely misdated recent creations…yeah…suuuuure…not buyin it.) I don’t really accept the evidence offered in your books as adequately well researched proof that the timeline runs into the millions of years.

    Its abundantly clear that, not entirely unlike Von Daniken and his ‘Of the Gods” series of misfires, you already have a belief firmly in mind, and there is no compelling reason for you to undermine your own belief by being critical of anything that might support it. So no matter how implausible the evidence, you accept it at face value…this as unscientific as the traditionalist who finds stonework in a Stone Age site that displays a higher level of handiwork that is generally accepted as possible…and simply dismisses it as accidental and meaningless…robbing the world of vital information about its past.

    You and that traditionalist are sides of the same awful coin. I can’t say what is certain…and I don’t try…but both of your books would have greatly improved by a healthy skepticism and a more robust attempt to investigate and analyse anomalous fossils instead of instantly categorizing even sketchy contradictory claims into the “proof positive” category.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I’ve read both Hidden History and Forbidden Archeology…not because I agree with them, but because the topic is generally fascinating to me and I take in as much as I can from as many different angles as possible.

    Let me only say that while I absolutely believe that there are timeline inconsistencies in our collective beliefs about the origins of man and civilization (ie. homo sapiens sapiens…as we know ourselves now…supposedly took 90,000 years to figure out more than fire and sharp sticks and rocks…so all city structures predating a few thousand years BC are merely misdated recent creations…yeah…suuuuure…not buyin it.) I don’t really accept the evidence offered in your books as adequately well researched proof that the timeline runs into the millions of years.

    Its abundantly clear that, not entirely unlike Von Daniken and his ‘Of the Gods” series of misfires, you already have a belief firmly in mind, and there is no compelling reason for you to undermine your own belief by being critical of anything that might support it. So no matter how implausible the evidence, you accept it at face value…this as unscientific as the traditionalist who finds stonework in a Stone Age site that displays a higher level of handiwork that is generally accepted as possible…and simply dismisses it as accidental and meaningless…robbing the world of vital information about its past.

    You and that traditionalist are sides of the same awful coin. I can’t say what is certain…and I don’t try…but both of your books would have greatly improved by a healthy skepticism and a more robust attempt to investigate and analyse anomalous fossils instead of instantly categorizing even sketchy contradictory claims into the “proof positive” category.

    • Haystack

      Let me only say that while I absolutely believe that there are timeline inconsistencies in our collective beliefs about the origins of man and civilization (ie. homo sapiens sapiens…as we know ourselves now…supposedly took 90,000 years to figure out more than fire and sharp sticks and rocks…so all city structures predating a few thousand years BC are merely misdated recent creations…yeah…suuuuure…not buyin it.)

      I think the long gap between physical and behavioral modernity and the formation of cities is one of the most fascinating mysteries in human evolution. You know what turns out to be one of the driving forces behind the birth of civilization? Beer.

      • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

        true that…you can’t have beer without pots, stored grain, and eventual fermentation (probably accidental at first…but in subsistence living…you eat anything…spoiled or no…can you imagine the first time someone got buzzed up on spoiled grain? lol…that was one happy Stone Ager…or perhaps the dawn of the Stoner Age…what if they were their times Beavis and Butthead.)

  • Haystack

    Let me only say that while I absolutely believe that there are timeline inconsistencies in our collective beliefs about the origins of man and civilization (ie. homo sapiens sapiens…as we know ourselves now…supposedly took 90,000 years to figure out more than fire and sharp sticks and rocks…so all city structures predating a few thousand years BC are merely misdated recent creations…yeah…suuuuure…not buyin it.)

    I think the long gap between physical and behavioral modernity and the formation of cities is one of the most fascinating mysteries in human evolution. You know what turns out to be one of the driving forces behind the birth of civilization? Beer.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    true that…you can’t have beer without pots, stored grain, and eventual fermentation (probably accidental at first…but in subsistence living…you eat anything…spoiled or no…can you imagine the first time someone got buzzed up on spoiled grain? lol…that was one happy Stone Ager…or perhaps the dawn of the Stoner Age…what if they were their times Beavis and Butthead.)