We Are the Children of the Stars (15 page)

I
F MAN IS a Hybrid, the evidence should be all around us. Consider the human body: It is a virtual storehouse of information, though there are still many mysteries about its functions. These physiological mysteries, we believe, constitute some of the most scientific proofs that Man is not strictly an Earth product of Evolution.

Out of literally hundreds of examples, only the major aspects of Man's physical differences from other species of primates, and from all animals, will be discussed in relationship to the Hybrid theory, extending into several chapters ahead.

1. Man is the only truly hairless mammal.
   
2. Only Man cries copious emotional tears.
   
3. Man has delicate fingers and sensitive skin.
   
4. The human skin has a low healing rate.
   
5. Man lacks diastemata (tooth gaps).
   
6. Subcutaneous fat in humans only.
   
7. Man has extraordinary facial mobility.
   
8. Man has a unique speaking apparatus.
   
9. Man swallows slowly.
   
10. Man has incredible eyes and seeing ability.
    

Through these and other data, Man's uniqueness could easily be established today via computer analysis. This would prove beyond doubt that, because of Man's many points of difference from other earthly creatures, he simply cannot be claimed as the end product of classical Evolution.

He must therefore be the result of
another unknown factor
. Of course, even the computers could not be expected to name that unknown factor, but we can – the starmen biomasters who created us. But the analysis could at least send science searching for the “unknown factor.”

And we wish here to state our willingness, in fact eagerness, to have this book's full data submitted to computer analysis.

The voluminous “fine points” we have gathered will lend themselves admirably to comparative computer studies. Just as the computers handling election-day figures can quickly cut through extraneous matter and strike at the core of what the results will be, so could computers weigh the many unique qualities of mankind and quickly give the answer, figuratively speaking:
Man is not solely a product of Earthly evolution.

Therefore, to complete our open offer to science, computer start-ups on this vital analysis await only the attention of scientists who read this book. If computer analysis proves our basic theory
wrong
, we will bow to the verdict.

But we will
not
feel it necessary to bow to the verdict of scientists and their own opinions. Let the book have a fair trial by an electronic calculator – a disinterested and completely objective third party. We feel that no scientist in advance can prejudge whether our data – which are indeed revolutionary – hold the germ of a great new truth. Scientists are prone to be humanly biased, at times, in controversial matters. Computers do not become swayed by such human failures.

We earnestly make this appeal to the scientific world to subject the theory of Hybrid mankind to this kind of accurate, unprejudiced evaluation by computer, in the name of fair play and objectivity.

Aside from computer calculations, scientists throughout the past century have had many doubts about the stubborn human
animal who refuses to fit into the evolutionary pattern. One such man was England's Sir Arthur Keith, the greatest medical anthropologist of his time, the early twentieth century. He made such outstanding contributions to the field that he was knighted in 1921. At the time Sir Arthur wrote the data we will present below, he was the most honored member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London.

The time is 1911 and Sir Arthur is writing for a distinguished English science publication:
¹

From 1890 to 1900 I devoted myself to an investigation of the Higher Primates making complete dissections of more than eighty animals. . . . An extensive analysis was made of the structural characters of each of these animal forms. . . . Some characters are common to all the members of the Higher Primates (Man, gorilla, chimpanzee, orang, gibbon) . . . and then a considerable number which are peculiar to each member, and may be regarded as acquisitions.

By “acquisitions” he meant separate traits acquired exclusively by one species. He comes to this emphatic conclusion: “Whatever theory is propounded [evidently
beyond
Darwin's theory!] for the origin of the several members of the Higher Primates must account for their structural and functional characters.”

Sir Arthur made an analytical list of the anatomical characteristics peculiar to each species, calling them “generic characters,” and he came out with this summary:

In short, each of these animals can be set apart from the others by individualistic traits. And this table, prepared by one of the world's foremost anthropologists, is of
paramount importance
as scientific support for the Hybrid Man theory.

Out of it leaps this tremendous fact: Of the higher primates, Man has 312 physiological characteristics
peculiar to humans alone
, many more than any other species.

Does this sound as though Man were some “close relation” to the great apes? Not if Man has
three times as many differences
from his “fellow primates” as any of the other specimens.

This seems to us convincing evidence that significantly lifts our concept out of the hypothetical class into a bonafide theory. And into a theory with such immense supportive evidence that it can, in our opinion, seriously challenge the classic Theory of Evolution.

Or, to put it another way, let us advance our thinking one more enormous step.

Let us suppose that if we knew all the facts of Man's origin, each and every one of those unique peculiarities of humans could be perfectly
explained
by reason of those characteristics having evolved elsewhere than on Earth – namely, in Man's space-ancestors on some other planet.

That puts us in new country again, breathing the fresh air of pioneer thinking.

For now we can begin to sketch in the first faint outlines of what our outer-space sires looked like and how they acquired unique non-earth-evolutionary characteristics that exist in their bodies – and perforce in our bodies here on Earth.

Is this to be our first glimpse of people we will meet some day? A meeting of ancestors and Hybrid progeny?

First we will point out that beyond Sir Arthur Keith's purely physical and anatomical attributes setting mankind apart from the primates, there are almost as many physiological differences, as partly listed before.

We shall now take those up one by one and also try to explain each in turn. In this chapter we will take up a major human mystery –
why is Man the only truly hairless mammal on Earth?

In an authoritative book quoted from before, we are told that out of some 4,237 species of mammals existing today, all are hairy or at least partly haired.
²
Some semi-hairless creatures can be eliminated for special environmental reasons – ground-burrowing moles
who always remain warm underground, armored animals like the armadillo, the wings (only) of bats, and aquatic animals like the whale and dolphin where streamlining has dictated a paucity of hairiness.

But, the author concludes, “the naked ape [Man] stands alone, marked off by his nudity from all the thousands of hairy, shaggy, or furry land-dwelling mammalian species.”

Then his “punch line,” so to speak – “If the hair has to go [in any species' evolutionary development], then clearly there must be a powerful reason for abolishing it.”

But how does an animal species devise
of its own doing
such a “powerful reason”?

According to Evolution, there is nothing unique in Man's
background
that could be classified as a “powerful reason.” The sentence should really read, “then clearly there must be a powerful reason
, in the hybridization experimentation of the starmen
, for abolishing it.”

Doesn't this statement suddenly make great sense? Now, just why would the starmen want Hybrid Man to be hairless, when a fur pelt is such good protection against cold and wounds and other hazards of daily living?

Explanation.
It may have been an accidental gene-trait transmitted to mankind during mating experiments of the starmen with the early men, simply because the starmen themselves were already hairless.

Why hairless? Because an intelligent race that has existed for long ages would obviously have worn clothing all that time, long enough to cause their own evolutionary change to hairlessness.

An Arctic explorer's skin, in his single lifetime, will adapt and become “tough” to withstand bitter conditions (even though it is not a trait inheritable by his children). But if the opposite happens, and men are constantly protected from any adverse environment, then the skin will not toughen up and will, indeed, let its hairy pelt wither or thin out.

In time
, that is. And remember, the starmen had tens of millions of years for such evolutionary processes to operate, to the
point where the gene of hairlessness became universal in all their race. But they, in turn, speeded it up and changed Man on Earth from the hairy
Homo erectus
to hairless
Homo sapiens
in a mere 500,000 years.

Doesn't that one glaring fact admit of no other explanation than the Hybrid theory? Darwin and Wallace both, and most evolutionists to this day, find Man's naked skin the greatest stumbling block to claiming earthbound natural selection for being the sole origin of Man.

To recapitulate: A hundred years ago, Darwin himself asked why Man did not have fur (hairy pelt) and found no really satisfactory answer.
³
He knew that the Australian aborigine, who has never worn clothes, is as hair-shy as Western Man. The monkeys and apes had an equal amount of time in which to develop hairless skin, but they did not.

We are maintaining that only the concept of Man as a Hybrid explains this enigma fully, completely, and perfectly.

To reiterate for clarity's sake, Man's lack of a pelt could be a direct inheritance from his outer-space ancestors. It is probable that a race which has been evolving for many millions of years would have worn clothing for eons and thus lost the need for protective hair.

Then, when Man's outer-space ancestors came to Earth and crossbred with the highest ape forms, a similarly hairless manlike creature was produced. This hybrid creature developed not just as a median form of Man with a reduced amount of hair but as an advanced form with
no
coarse hair, like the American Indians, who have no facial hair and do not shave. There is, however, apparent among humans a retrogressive type that has a virtual coating of real fur or, at least, very heavy hair. These varieties have been seen at the beaches. We will show how they, too, fit our theory, in a later chapter about simultaneous regression.

It almost seems axiomatic to say that, if evolutionary forces were entirely and solely responsible for Man's relatively hairless condition, then monkeys, apes, and other primates should show
various
gradations
of hairless and hairy skins, for they have had equal time in which to develop such a condition.

But all the primates are thickly endowed with hairy fur. Man's hairless skin, therefore, supports the concept that Man can only be a unique hybrid, setting him completely apart from every earthly beast known.

A whole book by a noted zoologist, under the title of
The Naked Ape
,
⁴
was devoted to this strange “anomaly.”

We are not yet done with the question of hair.

Each earthman carries another mystery of Evolution with him at all times – in the mop of hair on the top of his head. For, although Man is classified as a primate, he has very long hair on the top of his head –
a characteristic possessed by none of the anthropoids.

If it is thought that only the ape's arboreal life keeps him “bald” by means of branches constantly yanking out his head hair, zookeepers have observed that, when living in safe cages rather than trees, apes still do not grow hair on the head.

The female of our species also possesses very long hair on the head, which is again a characteristic that no other mammal displays. Where did this extraordinary topknot come from? What is its purpose, and why did Man evolve it though no other member of the primate family did? Then, too, how does the long-hair characteristic tie in with the Hybrid theory?
⁵

Explanation.

We again go back to when Man (Starman) evolved on a distant planet many millions of years ago. The passage of time and the unfolding of normal social patterns would, in the due course of time, cause Starman to adopt clothing, as we have stipulated.
⁶

But in time, extraterrestrial Man would also adopt the custom that still prevails in many sections of our world, of covering the head with some form of hat or cap. An unusual and disturbing discovery may have been made one day. It may have been recognized that the cultures that adopted and maintained head-coverings for use indoors and out become slightly and, in some cases even greatly, decadent. Culturally, scientifically, ethically, and in other
ways, their progress began to stop. These conclusions may have been at an unconscious rather than a conscious level.