We Are the Children of the Stars

by Otto O. Binder

  Implanted! . . . force! . . . law!

  Doesn't that sound exactly as if the speaker, too, suspected that some outside agency, not classical Evolution, accounted for the amazing growth of the HominidHomo brain in the past few million years?

  Perhaps it is not quite clear to the reader how truly extraordinary Man's brain is as compared to other creatures. As mentioned before, the ratio of a given animal's brain weight to total body weight is the key factor. Man stands head and shoulders above any animal, extinct or living, in this respect (with the unimportant exception of the tiny hummingbird, in which the brain had reached the minimum size to function as any sort of central “nerve box” and hence remained relatively large).

  The following table clearly shows how Man's brain represents a thinking organ of enormous proportions in relation to the body.16

  The significant figure is the last one, where the brain-weight to body-weight proportion has been “corrected.” This means that certain other organs or portions of the body, of certain species, need to be unproportionately large for survival considerations and should not count in the gross body-weight.

  For example, the blue whale carries an enormous extra weight in blubber, or fat, simply because his organism must be protected from icy waters in his daily life. When the blubber is “scaled down” to reasonable proportions, a more “average” body weight results, making for a more valid comparison with brain weight.

  Anyway, we can see at a glance that Man far outstrips all other creatures in the comparative size of his brain, by a factor of 35. The chimp comes in a very poor second with a factor of 5.2. Thus, Man's brain is seven times as “large” as the chimp's, not in actual weight, but in proportion to its functions and abilities. This comes close to the other comparative figure we gave before, where Man has ten times as many neurons (brain cells) as the chimp: 10 billion to 1 billion.

  From whatever angle the problem is examined, we are left with the stark truth that the human brain is a superanomaly that is hopeless for Evolution to explain.

  Our superbrained starmen sires are the true answer.

  13

  I.Q. Clues

  LET US START with a quote from a recent best seller by a noted researcher in archeology and anthropology: “Certainly the track of racial development from Hominids to Homo sapiens can be followed back clearly for millions of years.”1

  We, the authors of this book, are not so sure about that!

  To continue his statement: “but we cannot make nearly so definite a statement about the origin of intelligence. . . . So far I have not been fortunate to hear an explanation [from the anthropologists] of the origin of intelligence in Man that is even tolerably convincing.”

  He then later admits that even the physical development of Hominids is not as “clearly” traceable as he stated above, when he says, “Several million years passed before anthropoids came into being through natural mutations, but after that the dawn men [early ape-men] underwent a lightning-like development.”

  He then switches to mental development. “All of a sudden, tremendous advances appear about 40,000 years ago. The club was discovered as a weapon; the bow was invented for hunting; fire was used to serve Man's own ends; stone wedges [of advanced design] were used as tools, the first painting appeared on the walls of caves [by Cro-Magnon Man].”

  Then he, in turn, quotes Loren Eisley, professor of anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania, who stated that Man emerged from the animal world over a period of millions of years and only slowly assumed human features.

  “But,” Professor Eisley goes on, “there is one exception to this rule. To all appearances his [Man's] brain ultimately underwent a rapid development and it was only then that Man finally became distinguished from his other [primate] relatives.”

  The book's author makes his own evaluation, first saying that Man is a result of an artificial mutation (not through nature), then reenforcing that bold concept: “I voiced the suspicion that Homo sapiens became separated from the ape tribe by a deliberately planned mutation.”2 (Italics added.)

  He has been forced into this heretical (to science) conclusion because of the fantastic growth of the Hominid brain to its present human capacity. Let us examine this growth in more startling detail.

  Going back to the true apes of 15 to 30 million years ago, their brains ranged from 325 cubic centimeters to 500 cubic centimeters in bulk or volume. The early chimp, for instance, rated at 400 cubic centimeters.

  Now, the first-known Hominid, among the fossil finds of Dr. Louis Leakey in East Africa, was A. africanus, a very primitive Hominid of 2.7 million years ago who boasted of a 442 cubic centimeter brain – even less than the apes.

  However, living concurrently with him was a more advanced Hominid, A. robustus, who jumps to 530 cubic centimeters and immediately goes a cut above the anthropoids. Man, and his big brain, were already on the way.

  Australopithecus of a million years ago reached a brain capacity of 660 cubic centimeters, definitely above the apes.

  But then there came an enormous jump, and by 600,000 B.C., Homo erectus sported a brain up to 1,000 cubic centimeters in size. He was, as we previously noted, the first true Man of the genus Homo, and had already left the ape-brain far, far, behind.

  Now we come to one of the other major mysteries of the “descent of Man,” as Darwin put it, which really turns out to be an “ascent” of a remarkable nature.

  For after Erectus, the human brain not only reached its present-day peak but beyond. To quote an authority, “as we proceed backward in time the human brain increases rather than decreases in volume.”3

  Measurements of the capacity of Neanderthal Man's skull and brain-case, from many hundreds of specimens, indicates that, way back in 50,000 B.C., his brain was a whopping 1,400 to 1,600 cubic centimeters. Modern Man's is 1,300 cubic centimeters on the average!

  Cro-Magnon, modern Man's immediate predecessor, had an even more astonishing mass of gray matter, for he averaged up to 1,500 cubic centimeters.4

  This again is contra-evolutionary, as natural selection never endows a creature with a special trait and then lets it decline. The horse got bigger, the wolf family grew larger canines, the cat family became superbly muscled, the eland and kin became swifter runners. None of them fell off from those peaks of physical endowment.

  Nor did the brain matter in their heads show the slightest reduction as time went on, but rather increased slowly and steadily.

  So we have another anomaly confounding the evolutionists why does Man's ancestry alone show a decline in brain size from about 50,000 B.C. to the present day?

  What other answer can there be except an outside influence related neither to Evolution nor to Earth – namely, the starmen biologists.

  Another quote indicates how anthropological authorities inadvertently supported our theory, without actually naming that outside influence. “Both sides [Man's physical and mental development] are expressions of a third element which in essense escapes our definitive powers.”5 A “third element” that, like an invisible ghost, constantly haunts the evolutionary halls and cannot be exorcised.

  A similar uneasy feeling – uneasy with Evolution's quixotic attempts at explaining Man's miraculous intelligence – is expressed by another authority: “Unutterably alone, Man senses the great division between his mind and theirs [the other animals]. He has completed a fearful passage, but of the nature and causation even the modern biologist is still profoundly ignorant.”6

  “Fearful passage”? “Causation”? Was the author hinting at space travel, and a causation by star men?

  Understandably, even if he thought about extraterrestrials visiting Earth to cause the great “division” between the brains of Man and other creatures, he would not dare state this openly. He would be hooted out of the scientific fraternity and jeopardize his standing and career. Yet many such obscure quotes from honestly baffled scholars of human origins can be found scattered profusely throughout the literature of archeolo
gy, anthropology, and biology.

  Everywhere and in each generation since Darwin, those cautious skeptics admit that the human brain is “out-of-this-world,” and they thereby skirt on the very edges of proclaiming a nonearthly origin for this priceless gift.

  Returning to Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon Man, we might add our own comment, that their mental endowment amounts to having had an extra big brain yet virtually nothing to think about. For along with that huge brain did not, immediately, come civilization nor any advanced culture. Why did they advance so slowly and painfully where intellectual progress was concerned?

  This paradoxical situation reached its absurd peak when CroMagnon Man, who emerged on the world stage in 35,000 B.C., lived much like a primitive savage up to about 10,000 B.C. What accounts for that long empty gap of some 25,000 years in which his brain – just as big and sharp at the start as at the finish – did not in the least stir itself out of brutehood?

  There's something rotten in Evolution, if not Denmark, to misquote Shakespeare.

  Once more, of course, we step into the breach with our Hybrid Man Theory. We can make the educated guess here that the Neanderthal/Cro-Magnon brains were not as “finished” as modern Man's. That the starmen super-biologists realized this and improved the brain neurally (involving nerve paths, synapses, reaction time to stimuli, and so on) and succeeded so well, they were able to reduce the volume of the follow-on brain of Homo sapiens of today.

  Geneticists from another world, armed with great biological skills, could conceivably accomplish this brain-size reduction. Evolution never could, by its very definition. Evolution means advancement from a lower to a higher state.

  It allows for no retrogressions or backslidings. Each new endowment granted by natural selection through better mutations sticks tenaciously in the species, since it helps the species to thrive and multiply and spread.

  This brings us to another major point (briefly mentioned before) in the Theory of Evolution – natural selection never overendows a species.

  That is, natural selection bestows upon creatures only as much of a new and better physical trend as is needed to keep the species in the running, as it were.

  Since survival of the fittest is the rule, each creature is given only a slight edge over others in order to promote its survival. Mutations never became so all-powerful that they dominate and kill off all rival species.

  As the authoritative anthropologists of today put it, “Animals only acquire new characteristics if they provide some immediate advantage. They are never acquired merely by accident, to be stored away, as it were, like money in the bank.”7

  But the Neanderthal-Cro-Magnon-sapiens brain, which already came forth 35,000 years ago, was never fully used. The human brain's power did not truly manifest itself for another 25,000 years.

  Isn't that “money in the bank” that was stored away for future use?

  Yet such a superior trait is “never acquired.” So say the evolutionists, and they're stuck with it.

  To repeat, all specimens of animal life are in a sort of neck-and-neck race for survival. Natural selection, being a blind force born of necessity, does not and cannot shove one species ahead too far to become the all-out winner. Each species makes a tiny jump ahead in some way, but they all remain more or less even in the great race for survival.

  Except Man with his great brain.

  The awesome thinking organ of Man, at least ten times as efficient and “powerful” as that of the nearest anthropoid, and dozens or hundreds of times beyond the capability of the lower animals, is entirely out of line with the workings of natural selection.

  Yet it is one of the most basic of Evolution's “laws” that natural selection cannot overendow any species with more abilities than it needs.

  Then isn't the mighty human brain, which has given us lordship over all other living creatures, the most flagrant overendowment possible?

  Anthropologists have scrambled frantically but futilely to cover this glaring blemish in evolutionary theory.

  One rather fancy brainstorm (the originator shall remain mercifully unnamed) is that somewhere the brain of early Man acquired “feedback,” much like a computer. That is, his memory cells became so sharp that he was able to compare and weigh and evaluate things more accurately than animals, thus giving his brain a boost toward more complexity.

  But if this happened with the first Hominids whose line led to modern Man, then why did it take some 2 million years or more for that great “feedback” brain to manifest itself to its true extent? Why did the first glimmerings of applied intelligence and the start of civilization (a true “feedback” mechanism of the brain) have to wait until 10,000 B.C. for its debut?

  As in Carl Sagan's Sumerian legends before, there is more evidence that the very sudden process of mankind catapulting from brutehood to civilization on an overnight basis was also instigated by our starmen stagehands behind the scenes.

  But right now, to continue our premise that the human brain represents an overendowment to Man that is totally unallowable by Evolution's rules.

  Another statement by an authority gives a more definitive and very significant clue to this overendowment factor: “The neocortex of the Hominids evolved in the last half-million years, from the middle Pleistocene onward, at an explosive speed, which so far as we know is unprecedented.”8

  Explosive speed . . . unprecedented. Two very revealing phrases. In short, beyond whatever changes or improvements in a given species that natural selection had ever accomplished before.

  The title of the article is in itself startling: “Man – One of Evolution's Mistakes.”

  Anthropologist Loran C. Eisley said that the advent of the human brain “measured in geological terms, appears to have been surprisingly sudden.” He speaks of this “huge mushroom of a brain which has arisen magically between night and morning.” To make it plain he added, “When I said that the human brain exploded, I meant no less.”

  The cortex is the part of Man's brain that includes all his higher functions of thinking, calculating, abstract thought, and the intricate sorting out of sensory impressions. It includes the socalled forebrain (cerebrum), which furnishes Man with his gigantic intellectual abilities.9

  Most other animals have no forebrain at all. The primates like the chimp have a very small one. But the forebrain and cortex as a whole in Man constitute no less than 70 percent to 80 percent of his brain, with the remaining portion devoted to the cerebellum – hindbrain and midbrain.

  Together, these last two control all of Man's automatic bodily functions such as breathing, heartbeat, and the general autonomous workings of the body. The hindbrain, which controls Man's residue of “instinctive” drives – self-preservation, and so on – is the smallest part of the total brain mass, whereas in other animals it is by far the most dominant part.

  Obviously, it is the cortex (cerebrum, particularly) that has given Man his enormous intelligence, and that part, according to the article, developed with “explosive speed,” too explosively for the anthropologists to weakly explain away by mutations, stimulation by tool-making, or any other wholly inadequate factor.

  The shadow of an outside influence again looms in the background, as the only possible way for the seat of Man's great intellect to develop in a mere 500,000 or a million years to its present huge size in the human skull.

  Need we hint that this shadow is that of the starmen who hybridized mankind and genetically, or by crossbreeding, injected cortex-growth chromosomes into the human race's gene pool?

  Anthropological authority highlights another peculiar aspect of this inexplicable brain-growth, when it says, “the inference must be that the evolutionary processes that led to the emergence of more modern individuals from Homo erectus [the basic stock] were working more swiftly on the back of the head than on the face.”10

  Note again the word “swiftly” with the implication that the entire brain grew rapidly, but the back of the head even more swiftly. And the back of th
e head (from the brow-ridges to neck) is where the cerebral portion of the brain bulges the most, giving Man his tremendous intelligence.

  Let us get it more clear that natural selection absolutely “forbids” overendowment of any kind among any species, for this evolutionary fault is one of the sturdiest pillars by which our theory of Hybrid Man is supported.

  Among animals, the horse is an example of how natural selection can produce “jumps” in brain-size, for this happened among the equine species several times in relatively short (500,000-year) time-periods.

  But the end and final result is a bigger brain, for a bigger present-day species of horse, that is not intelligent. In other words, nature supplied the horse with successively bigger brains (to handle a bigger body) but stopped short of overendowment. The horse did not end up a brainy rival of mankind.

  So it was with every other earthly class of animals. No matter how much individual species or genera developed bigger and better brains, none of them achieved anything remotely resembling the power of reasoning and intellect possessed by Man alone. This, of course, includes all the apes.

  Our closest rival, the chimp, cannot produce mental images (imagination), cannot conjure up any extraneous thought (abstract thinking) beyond what is necessary for immediate daily life and survival. Comparing the mental abilities of Man and ape is like comparing a whale to a mouse and ignoring size to say, “See? They are both warm-blooded.”

  The gulf between the ape-brain's capability and that of Man's is quite as huge as the gulf between the body sizes of a whale and a mouse.

  Now, up to the Australopithecine Hominids of some 1 to 2 million years ago, their brain-sizes and capacities were not much more than the requirements for survival, as with other creatures. But when we come to Homo erectus in 600,000 B.C., the first true manlike species, we have the jump to overendowment. If Australopithecines survived for 1.5 million years, their brains obviously were adequate for their general purposes of keeping alive.