Tree Original

The Origin of Man

Any person seeking an answer to the question of how living things, including himself, has emerged, to find two different explanations. The first is the "creation", the idea that all living beings came into existence as a result of intelligent design. The second explanation is the theory of "evolution", which protects life that things are not the products of conception intelligent, but the coincidence of the causes and natural processes.
For a century and a half, the theory of evolution has been widely supported by the scientific community. The science of biology is defined in terms of evolutionary concepts. Between the two accounts of creation and evolution, Most people assume the evolutionist explanation to be scientific. Consequently, they believe that evolution is a theory supported by the observation results of science, while creation is seen as a belief based on faith. In fact, however, the scientific results do not support the theory of evolution. The results of the last two decades, especially in direct contradiction with the basic assumptions this theory. Many branches of science as paleontology, biochemistry, population genetics, comparative anatomy and biophysics, indicate that natural processes and coincidental effects can not explain life, as the theory of evolution proposes.

ORIGIN OF HUMAN

Darwin's assertion that humans and apes descended from a common ancestor in his book The Descent of Man, published 1871. From then until now, followers of the path of Darwin, have tried to support this assertion. But despite all the research that has taken place, the statement the "evolution of man" was not supported by actual scientific research, particularly in the field of fossils.
The man in the street is mostly unaware of this fact and believes that claims of human evolution is supported by a multitude of evidence. The reason This misjudgment is that the subject is frequently discussed in the media and presented as fact. But the real experts are aware that no scientific basis for the assertion of human evolution. David Pilbeam, a paleoanthropologist at Harvard University, said:
If you make a smart scientist from another discipline and showed little evidence that we would probably say, "Forget it, not enough to continue." ((Richard E. Leakey, The Making of Mankind, Sphere Books Limited, Barcelona, 1982, p. 43.))
And William Fix, the author of an important book on the subject of paleoanthropology, makes this comment:
As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have the audacity to say that there is 'no doubt' how man originated. If only I …(( Tests William R. Fix, hawkers Bone Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1984, pp. 150-153.))

This claim of evolution, they "lack of evidence," the tree of family Human begins with a group of monkeys that were claimed to constitute a separate genus, Australopithecus. According to the complaint, Australopithecus gradually began to walk upright, his brain grew and went through a series of measures to reach the current state of (human Homo sapiens). But fossils do not support this hypothesis. Despite the claim that all sorts of intermediate forms exist, there is an insurmountable barrier between the fossil remains of humans and apes. It also showed that the species described as species of other ancestors are actually contemporary who lived in the same period. Ernst Mayr, one of the biggest proponents of the theory of evolution in the twentieth century, states in its book a long argument that "all historical puzzles [] as the origin of life or of Homo sapiens, are extremely difficult, and may even resist a definitive explanation satisfactory. "((" science would end the idea of scientists who have definitive answers or the reluctance of society to pay the bills? "Scientific American, December 1992, p. 20.))

But what is the basis for the thesis of human evolution presented by evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to build imaginary interpretations. Totally history, more than 6,000 species of ape have lived, and most of them have disappeared. Today, only 120 species live on Earth. These 6000 or more species of monkeys, most of which have disappeared, are a valuable resource for evolutionists.
Moreover, the differences are considerable differences in the anatomical structure of different human races. In addition, differences have had even greater between prehistoric races, because time has passed human races are partially mixed with each other and become assimilated. Despite therefore remain important differences observed between different population groups living in the world today, as, for example, Scandinavians, African pygmies, Inuit, indigenous Australians, and many others.
There is no evidence to show that the fossil hominid named by paleontologists of evolution not actually belong to different species of monkeys or disappeared during races rights. In other words, no example of a transitional form between men and apes have been found.
After these explanations, examine the hypothesis of human evolution together.
The imaginary tree Male
The Darwinist claim contends that modern man has evolved from a species of ape-like creature. During this alleged evolutionary process, which is supposed to be part of 4 to 5 million years, said there was a form of "transition" between modern man and his ancestors. Under this scenario completely imaginary, the following four basic "categories" are listed:
1. Australopithecines (any of several forms which belong the genus Australopithecus)
2. Homo habilis
3. Homo erectus
4. Homo sapiens
Evolutionists call the genus to which the alleged monkey as man's ancestors belonged "Australopithecus" which means "southern ape." Australopithecus, which is nothing but an old guy monkey is extinct, is found in several different ways. Some of them are bigger and stronger (strong), while others are smaller and delicate (gracile).
Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as the genus Homo, which is "man". According to the evolutionary argument, the living of the Homo series are more developed than Australopithecus, and not very different from human modern. The modern man of today, ie the species Homo sapiens, is said to have formed in the last stage the evolution of this genus Homo.
Fossils like "Java Man, Peking Man," and "Lucy", which appear in the media occasionally and are found in evolutionist publications and textbooks, are included in one of the four groups mentioned above. Each of these groups are also assumed that the branch of the species and subspecies, if appropriate.
Some suggested transitional forms of the past as Ramapithecus, should be excluded from the family tree of human imagination after realizing that the monkeys were normal.
In presenting the links in the chain as "Australopithecus> Homo habilis> Homo erectus> Homo sapiens, evolutionists imply that each of these types is the ancestor other. However, recent findings by paleoanthropologists have revealed that Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus existed in different regions of the world simultaneously. In addition, some humans are classified as Homo erectus probably lived until recently. In an article entitled "Latest Homo erectus of Java: potential contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia", has been reported in the journal Science that fossils of Homo erectus in Java "means that the age of 27 ± 2 to 53.3 ± 4 thousand years" and this increase "[s] the possibility that H. erectus overlapped in time with anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) in Southeast Asia "
By also neandarthalensis Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens man (sapiens modern) also clearly co-existed. This situation apparently indicates the invalidity of the claim that one is the ancestor of another.
Intrinsically, all findings and scientific research have revealed that the fossil does not suggest an evolutionary process as evolutionists propose. The fossils, which evolutionists claim that the ancestors of humans, in fact, belong to different human races, or more species of great apes.
While fossils are human and what are the monkeys? Is it possible for any of them to be considered as a transitional form? With a view to finding answers, look at each category.

Australopithecus: A species of monkey
The first category, the Australopithecus genus, meaning "southern ape," as we have said. It is assumed that these creatures appeared in Africa about 4 million years and has lived up to 1 million years. There are a number of different species among astralopithecines. Evolutionists assume that the oldest Australopithecus species is A. afarensis. After that comes A. Africans, and then A. Robustus, the bones, which is relatively large. As for A. boisei, some researchers to accept it as a different species, and others as a subspecies of A. robustus.
All species of Australopithecus monkeys are similar to the extinction of great apes today. Its cranial capacity are the same or lower than chimpanzees today. There are projecting parts in their hands and feet are used to climb trees, like chimpanzees today, and their feet are constructed to capture stick to the branches. They are short (130 cm maximum. (51 inches)) and, like chimpanzees today, men Australopithecus is larger than the female. Many other functions, such as details in their skulls, the closeness of their eyes, their sharp molar teeth, their structure jaw, her long arms and short legs are proof that these creatures were no different from monkeys today.
However, Evolutionists claim that although australopithecines have the anatomy of apes, unlike apes that walked upright like humans.
The claim that the australopithecines walked right is a view that has been done to paleoanthropologists Richard Leakey and Donald C. Johanson for decades. However, many scientists who have conducted a broad front of research on the skeletal structures of australopithecines have proved the non-validity of this argument. Extensive research in various Australopithecus specimens by two major renowned anatomists from England and the United States, Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, shows that these creatures stand in human form. Having studied the bones of these fossils for a period 15 years by grants from the British government, Lord Zuckerman and his team of five experts to the conclusion that the australopithecines have a single common genus monkey and were definitely not bipedal, although Zuckerman is an evolutionist himself. Therefore, Charles E. Oxnard, another famous evolutionist for his research on the subject, also likened the skeletal structure of Australopithecus to that of modern orang-utans.
Briefly, the Australopithecines have no link with humans and are merely an extinct ape species.

Homo habilis: The monkey was presented as a human being
The great similarity between the skeletal structures and the skull of the Australopithecus and chimpanzees, and the refutation of the assertion that these creatures walked upright, have caused great difficulties paleoanthropologists evolutionists. The reason is that, according to the scenario imaginary evolution, Homo erectus comes after Australopithecus. As the genus name Homo (meaning "man") implies, Homo erectus is a human species and its skeleton is straight. Its cranial capacity is twice that of Australopithecus. A direct transition Australopithecus, a chimpanzee, monkey, with Homo erectus, which has a skeleton no different from modern man, is beyond question, even in theory of evolution. Therefore, "links", c. to d. forms of "transitional" are necessary. The concept of Homo habilis arose from this need.
The classification of Homo habilis was filed in 1960 by Leakey, a family of "fossil hunters." According to Leakey, the new species, classified as Homo habilis, had a relatively large cranial capacity, the ability to walk upright and use tools of stone and wood. Therefore, could be the ancestor rights.
New fossils of the same species discovered in the 1980s, completely changed this view. Some researchers, Bernard Wood and C. Loring Brace, who relied on fossils recently discovered, said that Homo habilis (which means "handyman" is say man capable of using tools) should be classified as Australopithecus habilis, or "skillful southern ape", because Homo habilis had many characteristics in common with the ape Australopithecus. His long arms, short legs and an ape-like skeletal structure as Australopithecus. His hands and feet were suitable for climbing. Her jaw is very similar to that of apes today. Its 600 cc capacity middle cranial is also an indication that they were monkeys. In short, Homo habilis, which was presented as a case separate by some evolutionists, was in reality a species of monkey as the other australopithecines.
Search the years because the wood Brace and work has shown that Homo habilis was indeed no different from Australopithecus. The skull and skeletal fossil OH62 found by Tim White showed that this species had a small brain size and long arms and short legs which allow them to climb trees like modern apes do.
The detailed analysis conducted by American anthropologist Holly Smith in 1994 shows that Homo habilis was not Homo, in other words "human" at all, but unequivocally, a "monkey". Speaking of the analysis in the teeth of Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis, Smith stated the following;
Limiting the analysis of fossil specimens that meet these criteria, patterns of development Dental gracile australopithecines and Homo habilis are classified with African apes. Homo erectus and Neanderthals are classified with humans.
In the same year, Fred Spoor, Bernard Wood and Frans Zonneveld, all specialists on anatomy, reached a similar conclusion in the method totally different. This method is based on the analysis of semicircular canals of the inner ear of humans and monkeys, which provides balance. Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld concluded that:
Among the fossil hominids the first species to show the morphology of modern humans is Homo erectus. In contrast, the dimensions of the semicircular canal in skulls from southern Africa attributed to Australopithecus and Paranthropus resemble those of major apes.
Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld also studied a Homo habilis specimen, namely Stw 53, and found that "Stw 53 relied less on bipedal behavior than the australopithecines. "This means that the sample of Homo habilis was more apelike Australopithecus species. This led to the conclusion that "STW 53 is somewhat intermediate between the morphologies seen in the australopithecines and Homo erectus.
This has led to two important results:
1. Called Homo habilis fossils are not really the genus Homo, ie humans, but that of Australopithecus, monkeys, for example.
2. Both Homo habilis and Australopithecus were creatures that walked bent forward which is to say they had the skeleton a monkey. They have nothing to do with the man.

Rudolfensis Homo: The face unduly cumulative
Homo rudolfensis term is the name given a few fragments of fossils found in 1972. The case was supposed to represent this fossil has been named Homo rudolfensis because these fragments fossils were found in the vicinity of Lake Rudolf in Kenya. Most paleoanthropologists accept that these fossils do not belong to a distinct species, but the creature called Homo rudolfensis is in fact indistinguishable from Homo habilis.
Richard Leakey, who unearthed fossils, presented the skull named "KNM-ER 1470, which said it was 2.8 million years, the greatest discovery in the history of anthropology. According to Leakey, the creature that had a small cranial capacity like that of Australopithecus with a face similar to that of Human by day, was the missing link between Australopithecus and humans. However, after a short period they realized that quasi-human face of KNM-ER 1470 skull, which appears frequently on the covers of newspapers and journals of popular science has been the result Error assembling fragments of skull, may have been deliberate. Professor Tim Bromage, which conducts research on the anatomy of the face rights, has brought this to light with the aid of computer simulations in 1992:
When [KNM-ER 1470] was reconstructed face has been installed in the skull in a nearly vertical position, much like the flat faces of modern humans. However, recent reports Anatomical show that in the face of life must have came out considerably, creating a single aspect, like the faces of Australopithecus.
The paleoanthropologist Evolutionary JE Cronin states the following about it:
… His face relatively robust construction, flattened naso-alveolar clivus, (recalling australopithecine faces used), low maximum cranial width (on time), canine juga and large molars and strong (as shown in the remaining roots) are features relatively primitives that combine the specimen with members of the taxon A. africanus.
C. Loring Brace of the University of Michigan reached the same conclusion. Following analysis conducted in the tooth structure of the jaw and skull in 1470 said that "the size of the palace and the enlargement of the area allocated to the roots of molars, it appears that the ER 1470 had fully Australopithecus sized face and dentition.
Professor Alan Walker, paleoanthropologist of Johns Hopkins University, who has done much research on KNM-ER 1470 as Leakey, maintains that this creature should not be classified as a member of Homo-ie, as a species, but rather should be placed in the genus Australopithecus.
In summary, classifications like Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis presented as a transitional link between Australopithecus and Homo erectus are entirely imaginary. It has been confirmed by many researchers today that these creatures are members of the Australopithecus series. All of their anatomical features reveal that this species are large monkeys.
This has been established by two evolutionist anthropologists, Bernard Wood and Mark Collard, whose research was published in 1999 in the journal Science. Wood and Collard explained that the Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis (Skull 1470) taxa are imaginary, and that fossils assigned to these categories must be attributed to the genus Australopithecus:
More recently, fossil species have been assigned to Homo on the basis of absolute brain size, inferences about language ability and hand function, and retrodiction their ability to shape stone tools. With few exceptions, the definition and use of gender in human evolution, and the demarcation of Homo, have been treated as if they are not problematic. But … recent data, new interpretations of existing data, and the limits of record paleoanthropological invalidate existing criteria for allocating taxa to Homo.
… in practice fossil hominid species are affected to Homo on the basis of one or more of four criteria. … It is now clear, however, none of these criteria is satisfactory. The Cerebral Rubicon is problematic because absolute cranial capacity is of questionable biological significance. It is also shown convincing evidence that the function of language can not be reliably inferred from the appearance of the brain, and the documents relating to the language of the brain are not so well situated as prior studies have suggested …
… In other words, hypodigms H. habilis and H. rudolfensis assigned to the genus Homo is not a genre well. So, the H. habilis and H. rudolfensis (or Homo habilis sensu lato that do not support the taxonomic classification of "Homo") should be removed from Homo. The taxonomy of alternative Obviously, it is to transfer one or two taxa in one of the first hominids existing genres, not without problems, but we recommend that, at present, the two H. habilis and H. rudolfensis must be transferred to the genus Australopithecus.
The conclusion of Wood and Collard corroborates the conclusion that we had here, "primitive human ancestors" do not exist in history. Creatures that is alleged that in reality are so cute, they should be assigned to the Australopithecus genus. The fossil record indicates that there is a evolutionary relationship between extinct apes and Homo, namely the human species that suddenly appears in the fossil record.

Homo erectus, and follows: humans
Under the proposed scheme invented by evolutionists, the internal evolution of the Homo genus is as follows: Homo erectus Firstly, then called "archaic" Homo sapiens and Neanderthals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) and finally, Cro-Magnon (Homo sapiens sapiens). However, all these classifications are really only variations and unique races of the human family. The difference between them is not greater than the difference between Inuit and an African or a pygmy and a European.
First look at Homo erectus, known as the most primitive species of man. As its name implies, Homo erectus means "man who walks upright". Evolutionists have had to separate these fossils from earlier, adding the qualifier of "verticality" because all the fossils of Homo erectus are available directly to a measure which is not observed in any of australopithecines or so-called Homo habilis specimens. There is no difference between the postcranial skeleton of modern humans and Homo erectus.

The principal reason for evolutionists defined Homo erectus as "primitive" is the cranial capacity of its skull (900-1100 cc), which is lower the average of modern man, and his thick eyebrows projections. However, there are many people who live in the world today who have the cranial capacity that Homo erectus (pygmies, for example) and other races that stand eyebrows (Native Australians, for example).
This is a agreement that differences in cranial capacity does not necessarily indicate differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence depends on the organization within the brain, rather than volume.
The fossils that have been Homo erectus, known throughout the world are those that Peking man and Java man in Asia. Without But when he realized that these two fossils are not reliable. Peking Man consists certain elements of plaster whose originals have been lost, and Java Man is "composed" a piece of the skull, more pelvic bone was feet from him and no indication that these belonged to the same creature. Thus, fossils of Homo erectus in Africa have gained such growing importance. (It is also noted that some of the Homo erectus fossils say were included in a second species called Homo ergaster " by some evolutionists. There is disagreement among experts on this issue. Allow to treat all these fossils in the classification of Homo erectus)
Specimens The most famous of the Homo erectus in Africa is the fossil of Homo erectus Narikotome "or the" Turkana Boy ", which was discovered near Lake Turkana, Kenya. It is confirmed that the fossil was that of a 12-year-old who would have been 1.83 meters tall in adolescence. Structure the vertical frame of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. The American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said that doubted that "the average pathologist could tell the difference between the fossil skeleton and that of a modern man." ((Boyce Rensberger, The Washington Post, 19 November 1984.))
As for the skull, Walker wrote that he laughed when he saw because "it looked so much like a Neanderthal man. "((Ibid.)) As indicated in the next chapter, Neanderthals are a modern human race. Thus, Homo erectus is also a race of modern man.
Even the evolutionist Richard Leakey states that the differences between Homo erectus and modern man are only racial variations:
One also differ in the shape of the skull, the extent of protrusion of the face, strong eyebrows and so on. These differences are probably more pronounced than we see now days between different geographical races of modern man. Such biological variation arises when populations are geographically separated from each other by significant periods of time.
Professor William Laughlin of the University of Connecticut have been examinations anatomical and Inuit people living on islands in the Aleutian Islands, and noticed that these people were extraordinarily similar to Homo erectus. Laughlin's conclusion was that all these different races were in fact different races of Homo sapiens (modern man).
When one considers the enormous differences that exist between remote groups such as Eskimos and Bushmen, known belonging to the species Homo sapiens, it seems justified Sinanthropus conclude that [an erectus specimen] belongs within this same diverse species.
It is now a fact more pronounced in the scientific community that Homo erectus is a superfluous taxon, and that the fossils are assigned to Class Homo erectus are not so different from Homo sapiens be considered as a distinct species. In American Scientist, the discussions on this issue and the outcome of a conference on the theme in 2000 is summarized in this thus:
Most participants at the Senckenberg conference has engaged in a debate on the taxonomic status of Homo erectus started by Milford Wolpoff of the University of Michigan, Alan Thorne of the University of Canberra and his colleagues. He argued forcefully that Homo erectus had no validity as a species and should be eliminated completely. All members of the genus Homo about 2 million years now, was very variable, widespread species, Homo sapiens, with no natural breaks or subdivisions. The theme of the conference, Homo erectus existed.
The conclusion drawn by scientists of the defense of the thesis mentioned above can be summarized as "Homo erectus Not a different species from Homo sapiens, but rather a race within Homo sapiens.
In addition, there is a difference between Homo erectus, a human race, and the apes that preceded Homo erectus in human evolution "scenario (Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis). This means that man first appeared in the fossil record suddenly and without any history of technical developments. This is a clear indication of his being created.
However, admitting this fact is completely contrary to the philosophy and ideology dogmatic evolutionists. Therefore, try to represent Homo erectus, a career truly human, half ape like creature. Homo erectus in their reconstructions, The toughness of the draw features the great apes. In addition, with drawing methods similar humanizing apes like Australopithecus or Homo habilis. With this method, designed to "approximate" the great apes and humans, and bridge the gap between these two different living classes.

Neanderthals
Neanderthals were human beings who suddenly appeared 100,000 years ago in Europe that have disappeared or been assimilated mixing with other races, quietly but quickly 35,000 years ago. Their only difference from modern man is that their skeletons are more robust and their capacity skull slightly larger.
Neanderthals were a human race, a fact acknowledged by almost everyone today. Evolutionists have tried very hard to present them as a sort of "primitive", however, all findings indicate that they are no different from a man "robust" walking the streets today. A leading authority in the matter, Erik Trinkaus, a paleoanthropologist at the University of New Mexico wrote:
Compared complete skeleton of Neanderthal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy indicating conclusively locomotor, manipulative, intellectual or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans.
Many researchers define the contemporary Neanderthals as a subspecies of modern man and call it "Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. Results testify that Neanderthals buried their dead, fashioned musical instruments, and had cultural affinities with Homo sapiens sapiens living in the same period. To put it precisely, Neanderthals are a "robust" human race that simply disappeared in time.

Homo sapiens archaic Homo Heilderbergensis and Cro-Magnon
Archaic Homo sapiens is the last step before contemporary man in the evolutionary scheme imaginary. In fact, evolutionists do not have much to say about these fossils, the differences are very few of them and modern humans. Some researchers claim that representatives of this race are still alive today, and point to native Australians as an example. As Homo sapiens (archaic), native Australians also have thick eyebrows projecting a structure tilted towards the inside of the jaw and a cranial capacity slightly smaller.
The group is characterized as Homo heilderbergensis in evolutionist literature is in fact the Just as archaic Homo sapiens. The reason why two different terms are used to define the type of man racial disagreement among evolutionists. All the fossils included in the classification of Homo heidelbergensis suggest that people who were very similar to anatomically modern Europeans lived 500,000 and even 740,000 years ago, first in England and Spain.
It is estimated that Cro-Magnon man lived 30,000 years ago. It has a dome shaped cranium and a broad forehead. His skull is 1600 cc more than the current average man. His skull has thick eyebrow projections and a bony projection on the back that is characteristic of both Neanderthals and Homo erectus.
While Cro-Magnon is considered a European race, the structure and volume of Cro-Magnon skull similar to those of certain races living in Africa and the tropics today. Based on this similarity, It is estimated that Cro-Magnon was an archaic African race. Paleoanthropological Some other findings have shown that the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal mixed breeds and laid the foundation for career today.
As a result, none of these people are "primitive species. They were different human beings who lived in earlier times and either assimilated and mixed with other races or have disappeared and vanished from history.

Species that live in the same age as their ancestors
What we have studied so far to get a clear idea: The scenario of "the evolution of man" is a fiction. For a tree as a family to represent the truth, a gradual evolution from ape to man must have taken place and a fossil record of this process must be able to find. In fact, however, there is a huge gap between apes and humans. Skeletal structures, cranial capacity, and criteria such as walking upright or bent sharply forward distinguish humans from apes.
A Another important finding that demonstrates that there can be no relationship between these trees of different species is that species that appear as the ancestors of others, in fact, lived together. If, as evolutionists claim, Australopithecus changed into Homo habilis, which, in turn, became Homo erectus, the periods in which they lived must necessarily have succeeded. However, there is a scenario, as seen in the Registry fossil.
Estimating changes Australopithecus lived from 4 million to 1 million years. The creatures classified as Homo habilis, on the other hand, is believed to have been equal to 1.7 to 1.9 millones years ago. Rudolfensis Homo, which was more "advanced" than Homo habilis, is known to be as old as 2.5 to 2.8 million years! Homo rudolfensis say is almost 1 million years older than Homo habilis, which is presumed to have been the ancestor. " In addition, the age Homo erectus goes back as 1.6-1.8 million years, which means that Homo erectus, appeared on Earth at the same time that ancestor supposedly Homo habilis.
Alan Walker confirms this fact by stating that "there is no evidence from East Africa to survive the end of that little guy were contemporaries of the first Australopithecus with H. habilis, then with the H. erectus. "((Alan Walker, Science, vol 207, 1980, p. 1103.))
Louis Leakey has found fossils of Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus almost next to each other in the region of the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, in the bed layer II.
Definitely not the same tree. Stephen Jay Gould, who was a paleontologist at Harvard University, said this deadlocked faced by evolution, although he was an evolutionist himself:
What has become of our ladder if there are three lines coexisting hominids (A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, Homo habilis and H.), none clearly derived from another? Moreover, none of show three trends noted during his tenure on earth.
When we change from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens, we again see that there are no trees to speak. The evidence indicates that Homo erectus and archaic Homo sapiens have continued to live for 27,000 years, even recently as 10,000 years of our time. The Kow Swamp in Australia, about 13,000 years, Homo erectus skulls were found. On the island of Java, Homo erectus remains were found that are 27,000 years old.

The Secret History of Homo Sapiens
Most interesting meaningful and cancels the foundation of the family tree imaginary evolutionary theory unexpectedly ancient history of man modern. Paleoanthropological results show that individuals homo sapiens, which was exactly as we lived up to 1 million years.
It was Louis Leakey, the famous evolutionary paleoanthropologist, who discovered the first findings on this issue. In 1932, Kanjira in the region around Lake Victoria in Kenya, Leakey found several fossils belonging to the Middle Pleistocene, and were not different modern man. However, the Middle Pleistocene was a million years. Since these discoveries turned the tree of evolution backwards, which were rejected by some evolutionist paleontologists. But Leakey has always claimed that its estimates were correct.
Just when this controversy was about to be forgotten, a fossil discovered in Spain in 1995 found a way remarkable history of Homo sapiens is much greater than previously thought. The fossil in question was discovered in a cave called Gran Dolina in the Atapuerca region of Spain by three Spanish paleoanthropologists University of Madrid. The fossil revealed the face of a child under 11 years who seemed quite as modern man. However, there have been 800,000 years since the child died. Discover magazine covered the story in great detail in its report in December 1997 number.
This fossil even shook the convictions of Juan Luis Arsuaga Ferreras who lead the excavation Gran Dolina. Ferreras said:
We expected something big, something grand, something inflated, you know, something primitive. We expect 800,000 years, was something like Turkana Boy. And what we found was a face modern …. For me, the most spectacular of these are the kinds of things that are troubling. Finding something totally unexpected as that. In the absence of fossils, find fossils is unexpected too, and that's fine. But the most dramatic thing is finding something that, according you belong to this in the past. It's like finding something and a tape recorder in Gran Dolina. It would be very surprising. We expect no tapes and tape recorders in the Pleistocene. Finding a modern face 800,000 years ago-is the same thing. We were surprised when we have seen.
The fossil highlight the fact that the history of Homo sapiens has been extended back to 800,000 years. After submission of initial shock, the evolutionists who discovered the fossil decided that belonged to a different species, because, as the pedigree of evolution Homo sapiens lived about 800,000 years. Therefore, consisting of imaginary species called Homo antecessor "and had the Atapuerca skull in this classification.

Cabin 1.7 million years
There were many findings demonstrating that the dates of Homo sapiens back before even 800,000 years. One of them is a discovery by Louis Leakey in the 1970s in Olduvai Gorge. Here at the Bed II layer, Leakey discovered Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus species coexisted in the same time. What is even more interesting is a structure found Leakey in the same layer (Bed II). Here, found the remains of a stone hut. The unusual aspect of the event was that this construction which is still used in parts of Africa, could have been built by Homo sapiens! Thus, according to Leakey's findings, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and modern man must have coexisted about 1.7 million years. This discovery must surely invalidate the theory evolution which says that modern man evolved from ape-like species such as Australopithecus.

The imprint of man Modern 3.6 million years!
In fact, some other discoveries trace the origins of modern man, new to 1.7 million years. An important conclusion is the fingerprint found at Laetoli, Tanzania, by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints are found in a layer that was calculated to 3.6 million years, and especially, no fingerprints that are different from modern man would leave.
The traces found More by Mary Leakey were later examined by a number of paleoanthropologists famous as Donald Johanson and Tim White. The results were same. White wrote:
Make no mistake about … They are like footprints of modern humans. If left in the sand on a beach in California today and four years, asked what it was instantly that someone had entered there. It would not be able to say a hundred other prints on the beach, or you. ((Donald C. Johanson & MA Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Mankind, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981 p. 250.))
After examining the footprints, Louis Robbins from the University of Northern California, made the following comments:
The arc is lifted, the individual had a lower arc bigger than me and the big toe is large and aligned with the second toe … The toes grip the ground as toes of the man. I did not see this in animal forms. ((New Science, Vol 115, 1979, p. 196-197.))
Examinations of the morphological form impressions have shown repeatedly they have been accepted as the footprints of a human being, and also a modern man (Homo sapiens). Russell Tuttle who also reviewed the footsteps wrote:
Homo sapiens small bare feet could make them … In all discernible morphological features, the feet of those who made the tracks are indistinguishable from those of modern humans.
Impartial Reviews footprints revealed their real owners. In reality, these footprints consisted of 20 fossilized footprints of 10 years, modern human and 27 footprints of an even younger. They were certainly modern people like us.
This has made the Laetoli footprints in the center of debate for years. Evolutionary paleontologists tried desperately to reach an explanation, because it was difficult for them to accept the fact that modern man was walking on the earth there are 3.6 million years. During the 1990s, the explanation of what follows "began to take shape: The evolutionists decided that these footprints must have been left by Australopithecus, because according to their theory, it was impossible for a Homo existed 3.6 years ago. However, Russell H. Tuttle wrote in a 1990 article:
In sum, 3.5 million years, the brand attributes the Laetoli site G resemble those of modern humans usually barefoot. None of its characteristics suggest that the Laetoli hominids were bipeds less capable than us. If the traces do not know that G is so old, that could easily conclude that it was made by a member of our genus Homo … In any case, we leave aside the case of losing the Laetoli footprints to make foreign Lucy, Australopithecus afarensis.
In short, these pieces that were supposed to be there 3.6 million years could not have belonged to Australopithecus. The reason why only the tracks are suspected have been left by members of Australopithecus was 3.6 million year old volcanic layer in which the fingerprints were been found. The drawings have been attributed to Australopithecus on the assumption that people man can not have lived long ago.
These interpretations of the Laetoli footprints demonstrate one important fact. Evolutionists support their theory is not based on scientific discoveries, but despite them. Here's a theory that is blindly defended no matter what, with all new discoveries that cast the theory that matter is ignored or distorted to support the theory.
In short, the theory of evolution is not science, is a dogma kept alive despite Science.

The stalemate of the evolution of walking upright
Besides the study of fossils, we have discussed so far, unbridgeable anatomical differences between men and apes also invalidate the fiction of human evolution. One has to see with the way you walk.
Humans walking on two feet. This is one of a very particular form of locomotion not seen in any other species of mammals. Some other animals have a limited ability to move when its two hind legs. Animals such as bears and monkeys can move in this way only rarely, and when they want to join a food source, and even then only for a short period. Normally, their skeletons lean forward and walk on all fours.
Well, bipedalism has evolved from a quadrupedal gait of apes, as evolutionists claim?
Of course not. Research has shown that the evolution of bipedalism has never happened, nor is it possible to have. Prime Instead, bipedalism is not an evolutionary advantage. The way the monkeys movement is much easier, faster and more efficient than bipedal Stride rights. Man can not move, jumping from tree to tree without descending to earth as a chimpanzee, nor run at a speed of 125 mph, as a cheetah. However, since man walking on two feet, it moves much more slowly in soil. For the same reason, it is one of the groups the most vulnerable of all species in nature in terms of movement and defense. According to the logic of the theory of evolution, the monkeys were not evolved to adopt a bipedal, humans have evolved up to become a quadruped.
Another impasse of the claim evolution is that bipedalism does not serve the development "progressive" model of Darwinism. This model, which is the basis of evolution requires that there be a compound "," intermediate step between bipedal and quadruped. Without But with the computerized search done in 1996, the British paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton showed a "composite" step was not possible. Crompton has drawn the conclusion Next: A living being can stand upright or on all fours. ((Ruth Henke, "Aus den Aufrecht Bäumen," Focus, Vol 39, 1996, p. 178.)).
A kind of step between the two is impossible because it would involve excessive energy consumption. This is the biped By what means can not exist.
The immense gap between man and monkey is not limited solely to bipedalism. Many other questions remain unexplained, as the ability brain, the ability to speak, and so on. Elaine Morgan, an evolutionist paleoanthropologist, makes the following confession on this subject:
Four of mysteries Back on humans are: 1) Why walk on two legs? 2) Why have lost their skin? 3) Why have developed such large brains? 4) Why learn to speak?
The orthodox answers to these questions are: 1) "I do not know" 2) "I do not know" 3) "I do not know" 4) "I do not know." The list of questions could be considerably lengthened without the monotony of responses.

Evolution: An Unscientific Faith
Lord Solly Zuckerman is one of science's most famous and respected in the United Kingdom. While, studied the fossil record and conducted many detailed surveys. He was elevated to the nobility for his contributions to science. Zuckerman is an evolutionist. As a result, Commenting on the changes can not be regarded as ignorant or prejudiced. After years of research on the fossils included in the case of human evolution, however, concluded that there is no truth in the tree is presented.
Zuckerman also advanced an interesting concept of "spectrum of science" ranging from those he considered scientific to those he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman the spectrum, the more "scientific", ie based on evidence fields are chemistry and physics. Then come the biological sciences and social sciences. At the other end of the spectrum, which is the part that is considered as more "scientific" are "extra-sensory perception" of concepts such as telepathy and the "sixth sense" and finally "the evolution human. Zuckerman explains his reasoning as follows:
Then, move right to cancel the registration of objective truth in these areas presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or interpretation of the fossil history of man, where the faithful everything is possible – and where passionate believer is sometimes able believe several contradictory things at once.
Robert Locke, editor of the discovery Archaeological, a major publication on the origins of man, wrote in this magazine, "The search for human ancestors gives more heat than light, "quoting the confession of the famous evolutionist paleoantropologist Tim White:
We are all frustrated by "all issues that have not been able to answer. "
Locke article reviews the current impasse of the theory of evolution in human origins and theoretical propaganda on this subject:
Perhaps no area of science is more contentious than the search for origins rights. Elite paleontologists are agreed on the outline, even the most basic family tree of man. New branches grow with great fanfare, only to wither and die in the face of new fossil finds.
The same fact was also recently accepted by Henry Gee, editor of the journal called Nature. In his book In Search of Deep Time, published in 1999, Gee years, all evidence points to evolution rights "10 to 5 million euros, several thousands of generations of living creatures can fit in a small box." He concludes that conventional theories about the origin and development of human beings are "entirely a human invention created after the fact formed according to the prejudices of man "and he adds:
To have a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as the story, funny, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.
So what is the reason why many scientists as tenacious of this dogma? Why have they tried very hard to keep his theory alive at the expense of the admission of many conflicts and lay the evidence found?
The only answer is fear they will encounter in if abandoned the theory of evolution. The fact that they will face when they leave evolution is that God created man. However, taking into account budgets and off the materialist philosophy which, they believe that creation is a concept unacceptable to the evolutionists.
For Therefore, they are wrong, and the world, using media with which they cooperate. If they can find fossils is necessary "to do" Tables one imaginary or fictitious models and try to give the impression that indeed there are fossils of monitoring situations. Some media who share their materialistic point of view, are also trying to deceive the public and to instill the history of evolution in the subconscious of people.
No matter how hard you try, the truth is obvious: the man did not come into existence through an evolutionary process, but by God's creation. Therefore, it is accountable to it.

Please see things in this book to learn more about the origin the lives of others:
Refuted Darwinism (book):
PDF file format:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=85&Format=pdf

Word File Format:
http://api.fmanager.net/api_v1/xmlapi.php?dev-t=EDCRFV&with=mod=file, id = 13732

Another useful book and a Web site in different languages:
Evolution Deceit (Book)
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=462&Format=pdf
Website Web:
www.evolutiondeceit.com

The imagination of Darwin
The person who introduced the theory of evolution in the way defending today was an amateur English naturalist Charles Robert Darwin.
Darwin never had a formal education in biology. It took one amateur interest in the field of nature and life. His interest led him to voluntarily join an expedition aboard a ship called the HMS Beagle, which left England in 1832 and traveled through different regions of the world for five years. The young Darwin was impressed by different species of life, especially as he saw some finches in the Galapagos Islands. I thought that variations in the peaks were caused by their adaptation to their habitat. In this spirit, it is assumed that the origin of life and species present in the concept of "adaptation to the environment". Darwin cons that God created different living species separately, suggesting that it did not come from an ancestor common and differ from each other due to natural conditions.
Darwin's hypothesis was not based on a scientific discovery or experiment, Over time, however, it turned into a pretentious theory with the support and encouragement he has received from the famous materialist biologists of his time. The idea was that individuals who have been adapted to the habitat best qualities passed on to subsequent generations, these advantageous qualities in accumulated over time and transformed individuals of a species entirely different from their ancestors. (The origin of these "advantageous qualities" was unknown at the time). According to Darwin, man was the result of this mechanism more imagination developed.
Darwin called this process "evolution by natural selection." He thought he had found "The Origin of Species' the origin of a species is another case. He published these ideas in his book The Origin of Species by Natural Selection 1859.
Darwin was aware that his theory faces many problems. He admitted this in his book chapter "Difficulties theory. These difficulties primarily involved the study of fossils of complex organs of living beings could not be explained by coincidence (eg eye), and the instincts of living beings. Darwin hoped that these difficulties will be overcome by new discoveries, but it will not stop not come through a series very inadequate explanations for some. The American physicist Lipson commented on "difficulties" of Darwin:
After reading The Origin of Species, I found that Darwin was much less confident that what is often represented be the chapter entitled "Difficulties of the theory" For example, programs of self-doubt considerable. As a physicist, I was particularly intrigued by his comments on how the eye would have happened. ((HS Lipson, "View of a physicist's theory Darwin, the evolutionary trends in plants, Vol 2, No. 1, 1988, p. 6.))
While developing his theory, Darwin was impressed by many evolutionary biologists who preceded him, and especially by the French biologist Lamarck. According to him, living creatures rose traits they acquired during their lifetime from one generation to the next and so evolved. For instance, giraffes evolved from antelope like animals by extending the neck more than one generation to another while trying to reach branches increasingly high food. Darwin used this way, the thesis of "passage of acquired characteristics, proposed by Lamarck, as a factor in things that life is changing.
But both Darwin and Lamarck wrong because in his time, life could not be studied with the very technology primitive to very poor. Scientific fields such as genetics and biochemistry did not even exist in the name. Their theories have therefore been rely entirely on their power of imagination.
While the echoes of Darwin's book reverberated, an Austrian botanist named Gregor Mendel discovered laws of heredity in 1865. Not much heard the end of the century, Mendel's discovery gained great importance in the 1900s. This was the birth of the science of genetics. Shortly after, he discovered the structure of genes and chromosomes. The discovery of the 1950s, the structure of the DNA molecule that incorporates genetic information threw the theory of evolution into a major crisis. The reason was the incredible complexity of life and disability of the mechanisms of evolution proposed by Darwin.
These developments should have led to the theory Darwin being relegated to the dustbin of history. However, because certain circles insisted on revising, renewing and raising scientific theory to a platform. These efforts gain meaning only if we realize that behind the theory was more ideological intentions rather than scientific concerns.

Interest Links:
Videos:
THE MIRACLES OF THE QURAN:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1245

The collapse of Atheism:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1244

THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE:
http://harunyahya.com/m_video_creation_universe.php

The miracle of human creation:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1249

Books:

The collapse of evolution theory in 20 questions:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=80&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Disasters Darwinism brought to humanity:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Millions of tests to refute Darwinism
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Response to the final evolutionary propaganda:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
How Fossils Overturned changes
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The religion of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1959&Format=rtf
=*=*=*=*=
It is no coincidence:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1815&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
A propaganda Definitive Reply to evolutionary
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Why Darwinism is incompatible with the Koran:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=208&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Disasters Darwinism brought to humanity
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Fascism, murderous ideology of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=225&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Dark Spell of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=2182&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Golden Age
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1462&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=

For =* Help FEEL FREE TO E-MAIL ME ON *=
smiling4ever222@hotmail.com

About the Author

Tree Gator 98183 20-Gallon Treegator Original Slow-Release Watering Bag $14.95 Treegator® Portable Drip Irrigation System – You’ve seen these in professional landscapes around your neighborhood, now you can care for your trees as the pro’s do! Reduce plant shock; perfect for soaking trees before digging; adjustable water flow rates;…

Enchantmints Horse Fairy Musical Jewelry Box $17.28 This adorable music box is a safe place for earrings, bracelets, charms and sachets!…

Ballerina Treasure Music Box $17.69 This adorable music box is a safe place for earrings, bracelets, charms and sachets!…

Recordings $13.99 Last remaining copies of numbered limited edition 2001 release for the progressive rock act. ‘Recordings’ finds them moving away from the more song based aspects of their albums, ‘Stupid Dream’ (1999) & ‘Lightbulb Sun’ (2000). Nine tracks including recordings from the ‘Lightbulb Sun’ sessions, rare UK singles tracks & an extended version of ‘Even Less’. Slipcase….

Under the Jasmin Tree/Space $14.99 UNDER THE JASMIN TREE (1968) & SPACE (1969) by the Modern Jazz Quartet (a 2-on-1 CD) Two albums of high-class improvisational bebop recorded by Atlantic Records legends the MJQ while on secondment to Apple. With their unique line-up of piano, vibes, bass and drums, the Quartet brought old-style tuxedo excellence and cool organic jazz to the Apple catalogue. This Remastered CD includes one Bon…

Joshua Tree (Remastered / Expanded) (Deluxe Edition) (2CD) $10.04 Having nearly exhausted their capacity for pop-song politics on War and The Unforgettable Fire, U2 turned toward themes of personal identity and complex relationships on The Joshua Tree. Not that the group was willing to come down off the barricades entirely: “Mothers of the Disappeared” and “Bullet the Blue Sky” turned a jaundiced eye toward Central America and the United States’ role there. But …

Goodbye Mr Chips [VHS] $2.99 One more terrific film from a terrific year for movies–1939, the year of Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, and Stagecoach, among others–Sam Wood’s Goodbye Mr. Chips is a deeply stirring work starring Robert Donat as the old schoolmaster who looks back upon his life. Told mostly in flashbacks, the film wraps itself around a history of an older England as seen through the generations of boys …

Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree [VHS] $10.00 Four Winnie the Pooh shorts are repackaged into one set: Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree (1966), the Oscar-winning Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day (1968), Winnie the Pooh and Tigger Too! (1974), and Winnie the Pooh and a Day For Eeyore (1983). The first three were strung together in 1997 as the popular film The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. The merits of these adaptations of A.A. Mil…

The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh (25th Anniversary Edition) [VHS] $5.25 Disney’s 1977 The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh may be the last word on (animated) Pooh because it so faithfully honors the first word on Pooh, penned in the 1920s by British storyteller A.A. Milne. Gently paced, subtly humorous, and blessedly understated, this adaptation reflects Walt Disney’s original vision to develop the beloved British bear for a wider audience. The film is essentially a…

Pjur Original Bodyglide 250 Ml $23.38 Pjur Original Bodyglide is designed to provide optimal lubrication. This premium silicone formula personal lube is an excellent skin conditioner and moisturizer, Pjur Original is hypoallergenic with no odor or taste, and is safe for daily use for intimate and body care. Medical grade ingredients and a unique formula make Pjur Original, the worlds best selling silicone formula, the slipperiest sili…

Kindness (Cypress Tree) – original song

Cuthbertson England Original Christmas Tree Sugar Bowl $12.99

Antique Arcade Christmas Tree Stand Original Red Paint $14.99

The ORIGINAL SANTAS LAST XMAS TREE STAND CHRISTMAS NEW $15.00

D’OYLEY ORIGINAL OIL PAINTINGS-HUGE MODERN TREES ART $599.00

30×30 ORIGINAL Abstract Art “Color Trees” by Dao Zhang $129.00

Cox 1/24 Scale Original Chaparral Chrome Tree for Parts $12.49

Original Art Painting~Tree~Modern~Folk Art~PALMER $19.99

Green Tree Frog Original Art Print by Di $11.79

Detailed Tree Frog Form Original art print by Di $53.03

TREE FROG Bee Insect Gum Original art print by Di $51.20

Green Tree Frog on Aloe Vera Original art print by Di $51.20

Green Tree Frog Magnolia Dragonfly Original Art PrintDi $51.20

Baby Bird on a Tree Branch (original) $10.00

DEPT 56 ORIGINAL SNOW VILLAGE NICK’S TREE FARM RETIRED $12.99

U2 1987 JOSHUA TREE Tour Program w/ original envelope $99.99

Trees Field Sky Landscape Original 9 x 12 Oil Painting $24.99

1998 BARBIE TREE TRIMMING CHRISTMAS ORIGINAL BOX $34.99

ACEO Original Painting watercolor Fall Colors trees Art $9.99

Original Painting Necklace Jewelry – GOLDEN BIRCH TREES $30.00

ACEO Original Painting watercolor Lake Sunset Pine tree $9.99

ACEO Original Painting watercolor Lake water tree art $9.99

Man in a Tree (original male art print) $30.00

ACEO original ANIMAL RACCOON BIRCH TREE by CH.K $9.99

Metal Wall Art Abstract Tree Landscape Original Decor $235.00

ACEO original BIRD GREAT TIT BERRY TREE LEAVES by CH.K $4.99

original art 3 birds in tree painting purple and gray $39.00

Original Armarkat Cat Tree Pet Furniture Condo #X5703 $139.00

Original Armarkat Cat Tree Pet Furniture Condo #X7501 $151.00

Original painting by Austin Moody “Indian Death Tree” $450.00

ORIGINAL HALLOWEEN SPOOKY CAT TREE FOLK ART PAINTING $20.00

original art Halloween Owl In A Tree painting folk pop $24.99

Metal Wall Art Abstract Tree Landscape Original Decor $285.00

ORIGINAL HALLOWEEN witch CAT TREE FOLK ART PAINTING $20.00

Janet Zeh Original Art Landscape Painting Apple Tree NR $39.00

ORIGINAL HALLOWEEN SPOOKY CAT TREE FOLK ART PAINTING $31.00

Original Oil Painting LARGE Art_ASPEN TREES SKY_Helena $349.00

BIG ORIGINAL MODERN ABSTRACT SURREALISM RED DESERT TREE $78.88

Original Armarkat Cat Tree Pet Furniture Condo #X6606 $149.00

Original Armarkat Cat Tree Pet Furniture Condo #X5802 $132.00

ACEO Original Painting watercolor Forest Landscape tree $9.99