Anthropology & Paleontology

Taxonomy and the Tree of Life

• Tree of Life: Darwin’s “tree of life” was essentially just a spreadsheet. Earnst Haeckel published sketches of a tree with branches depicting various kinds of life with differences being more minute as you move from trunk to branch to twig. The analogy can be compelling, especially if presented enthusiastically, but the same tree graphic can be used equally well to explain common design rather than common decent.

• Taxonomy – The Science of Kinds: Taxonomy is the science of classification of life forms. It is a science that studies the arrangement and ordering of life and classifies the life into a logical hierarchy by observing distinct characteristics. This logical hierarchy is most often described using a “tree” style. The science of taxonomy appears superficially to illustrate similarities such as would favor the continuous variability required by evolutionary theory, however as a science the observations are meaningful because of distinct differences, not general similarities. Life is ranked into kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species. Evolution assumes life began with very small and simple components which multiplied and over time different groups took different “evolutionary paths.” Some of that original life became what is today the plant kingdom while other life became the animal kingdom. Some developed exoskeletons (insects) with six legs while others developed endoskeletons (internal bones) and others developed into things like arachnids, jellyfish, and so forth.

• Systematic Gaps: Taxonomy is possible because kinds are unique in very specific and significant ways. There are systematic gaps between kinds. These observed gaps pose a problem for evolution because there should be a continuous stream of change between kinds. Because the gaps are so obvious in life forms today, evolutionists turn to the fossil record in hopes of filling in these gaps and thus make science fit the philosophy.

• Example Gaps: Unexplained jump from protozoan to metazoan invertebrates. There is no known evolutionary progenitor for trilobites. There is nothing in the gap between vertebrates and invertebrates. There is nothing between spines and shells. There is nothing between fish and amphibians between amphibian and reptile, or between reptile and bird or mammal. There are no fish with leg precursors. The nearest such animal, the coelacanth, was thought extinct in the Mesozoic era until one was caught off the coast of Madagascar in 1938. It was found to have a body and bone structure identical to its fossil supposedly millions of years old. There are 32 orders of mammals and no indication of any transitions in the fossil record to or between them. The fact some reptiles like pterodactyls could fly don’t prove they became birds any more than bats prove mammals came from reptiles.

• Unchanging Gaps: Relatively few fossilized animals or plants are extinct today in spite of the modern rate of extinction of various species in both kingdoms. While this presents its own math problem for evolution, more profound is the fact that most fossils represent almost identically their living counterparts today. Either the vast majority of life stops evolving after it gets some of its members fossilized or else the fossil record is not necessarily all that old after all. Regardless, the fact that modern gaps match fossil gaps only amplifies the gap problem for evolution. Systematic gaps are predicted by the creation model.

• Punctuated Equilibrium: This is a relatively recent term used to describe the long periods of little or no Evolution with sudden jumps called quantum speciation. This term sounds good, but completely lacks genetic evidence. Perhaps one of the biggest mysteries and problems within the evolutionary scheme is the accepted "cambrian explosion" where much of the basic animal life from which modern animals are supposedly evolved popped onto the scene in a geologically (and evolutionarily) very brief time.

• Evolution Model: The theoretical model is built on the materialistic premise of random beneficial mutation (increasing net order/complexity) with natural selection. The model predicts small, gradual and constant changes taking place over time. Reality is that the fossil record and contemporary nature show systematic gaps. Interspecies mating is predicted between similar species. The reality is that interspecies mating does not work and those few exceptions like ligers and mules are sterile.

• Creation Model: The model is built on the revealed word of God which states the Creator made all life as unique kinds in a few days time, a few thousand years ago, by supernatural means. There is considerable scientific evidence supporting a relatively young planet. The distinctions between kinds (system gaps) observed fit the Creation Model. The inability to produce interspecies kinds capable of reproducing is predicted. Natural selection serving as a conservation process (rather than as a creative process) is predicted.

Problems Filling in the Gaps

• Archaeopteryx: In the 1860’s a fossil dubbed “archaeopteryx” was unearthed from a German quarry. Its unusual features include a tail which resembles a lizard and unusual claws. It was first thought to be half-bird and half-reptile. Birds have a number of very distinct characteristics from reptiles including wings, feathers, wishbone, weight distribution, and so forth. Studies have since proven this animal is a member of a now extinct group of birds and was not at all reptilian. Even using evolutionary index fossil dating, this particular bird is supposed to have lived later than its supposed progeny, not before.

• Coelacanth: There are no fish with leg precursors. The nearest such animal, the coelacanth, was thought extinct in the Mesozoic era until one was caught off the coast of Madagascar in 1938. It was found to have a body and bone structure identical to its fossil supposedly millions of years old. This “prehistoric” fish does not have legs or any “precursor” to legs. The fact is lives today testifies its uniqueness as a kind rather than its supposed place as a transitional creature.

• Archeoraptor: Archaeoraptor was presented in 1999 as part bird and part dinosaur. It provided clear evidence of a missing link. Then it was proven to be a fake. A Chinese paleontologist created it by gluing a dinosaur tail onto the fossil of a now extinct bird. Unfortunately a lot of fake fossils are presented as new finds because they are very profitable.

• Bambiraptor: In Florida a fossil was dubbed “bambiraptor.” It was a chicken sized dinosaur with what was purported to be turkey DNA. A reconstruction used certain bird elements, such as eagle eyes, to make it appear more birdlike. The DNA evidence, it turns out, was actually contamination from a technician’s lunch.

• Java Man: Java Man is thought to be the ultimate icon of the missing links. Java Man was discovered in Indonesia in 1891/92 by Dutch scientist Eugene Dubois. It was a skull fragment found among some bones by a river bank. Many people believe Java Man to have included a complete skull, smaller than modern man’s, to prove earlier man had lower intelligence. Java Man actually included only a skull cap along with a few teeth and a femur. Analysis of the skull cap shows that while the bones were from a relatively small human, the brain capacity was well within modern norms.

• Neanderthal: Neanderthal has a more pronounced brow and slightly different head shape. There are a few dozen samples of these various skulls and other bones. These samples have all yielded brain sizes well within the normal range of modern humans. Other bones from these bodies, when found, have shown little if any other differences from modern man. The brow and skull differences could easily be explained by disease or, more likely in light of the biblical account, great age. The racial variation of homo erectus and especially Neanderthal compared to homo sapien have been wildly exaggerated in artistic renderings to promote the concept of Darwin’s tree. Examination of physical evidence shows the differences between these races are superficial.

• What About Similarities Between Man and Ape?: Taxonomic classifications are based on clear distinctions between organisms of varying degrees of similarity. DNA similarity is also used as evidence for Evolution. In spite of the difficulty in DNA coming to be by Evolution, the relative similarity in DNA structure is what Evolutionists concentrate on. Ape DNA is about 99% similar to human DNA, although humans and apes have a different number of chromosomes. It is interesting to note mouse DNA is also roughly 99% similar to human DNA. Obviously the great similarity doesn’t matter nearly as much as the minute difference.

Earnst Haeckel’s Embryo Drawings

• History: Earnst Haekel based his research on the same sources used by Darwin and quickly capitalized on Darwin’s work when it was published. Haeckel published a set of sketches as vivid proof of similarity of species at their earliest stages of development. The images showed embryos of fish, salamander, tortoise, chicken, hog, calf, rabbit, and human side by side at three stages of development. The similarities are supposed to support Darwin’s tree of life sketches and the idea of common ancestry.

• Faked: In the 1860s his drawings were soon proven false. Actual photographs of embryos of these creatures do not match Haeckel’s drawings. His drawings were deliberately doctored to misrepresent the real appearance of the embryos. Even so, evolutionists persist in promoting this myth. The false images and romantic lore are compelling to impressionable minds.

• Cherry Picked: Embryo selections were “cherry picked” to give the closest appearance of similarity. There are several classes of vertebrates, yet Haeckel only used examples from a few that came closer to providing the desired result. He then compounded similarities by “editing” the pictures.

• Stage of Development: Haeckel claimed the images were from the earliest stages of embryonic development. That was also untrue. His drawings were based on mid-term development when the cells have begun to develop and grow, after the first several rounds of cell reproduction and before they begin to take on truly unique appearance. During this period there is greater similarity than either early cell division or the later obvious development of body structure.

• Human Gills: In 1996 Life published pictures of a human embryo at a stage which made it look as if the embryo had something resembling gills. Many modern biology books promote similar ideas about the appearance of the human embryo. Of course the folds of skin at a certain stage when the embryo is still doubled over itself may look a bit like gills, but it is a very normal stage of embryonic development. Most of us have folds in our adult skin, but no one suggests those folds could be used for breathing under water.

• Facts & Propaganda: Our knowledge of genetics today was completely unknown in the mid-19^th century. Haeckel was perhaps far more dogmatic about his philosophical beliefs than Darwin. Darwin couldn’t peer inside a cell as we can today. Had he known about the thousands of amino acids used to construct genetic material inside a living cell he might very well have come to a different conclusion. Cells are impossibly complex to be explained by random organization into hundreds of tiny organic machines, each with dozens to hundreds of molecular components.

• Haeckel Today: In spite of all this many modern text books still use his drawings as proof of evolution. Evolutionists who are aware of these problems still claim that while the details contain errors, the concept is still true. It is not true. Most text books used in high schools and college biology classes still support Haeckel’s concept if not the artwork itself. Haeckel’s basic argument was that similarity argues for evolution. Similarity of design is just as easily argued, but the argument of design also accounts for the differences, parallelisms, and other observations of nature where evolution fails.

Fossil Record

• Gaps: There are systematic gaps between kinds in the fossil record just as there is between creatures living today.

• Index Fossils & Dating: Evolutionary theory requires upward development of complexity over a long period of time. Index fossils are fossils of certain animals believed to have lived during specific historical periods. While all such dates are theoretical, they are generally touted as if fact. Radio-dating methods are used for validation only when they support the relative chronology and when they fit the evolutionary mathematical models.

• Quantities & Distribution: The number of fossils found around the globe is astounding. Certain types of fossils tend to be clustered together in certain geographical areas. For example, large numbers of dinosaur fossils are often found relatively close together. This is often accounted for by saying the animals traveled together in herds in a relatively small area. It is far more likely that great animals grazed vast areas and that herds were washed together into a common graves by the power of a some water catastrophe. Without water or volcanic burial most organic life would decay or be consumed by other life without ever having an opportunity to be fossilized.

• Polystrata: Polystrata fossils are a huge problem for evolutionists. These are fossils like whole tree trunks found laying on their side or even overturned under deep layers of solid rock. Some excellent specimens can be found inside the Grand Canyon.

• Marine Life: Many forms of marine life are very soft, such as jellyfish. Such creatures should never ever become fossilized, especially not in any substantial quantities. The fact that such creatures have been discovered fossilized indicates they were very rapidly buried in soft sediment which hardened relatively quickly. Vast fossil beds exist with all sorts of marine life that in contemporary nature would be eaten by other marine life or simply dissolved by the sea rather than becoming fossils. These fossils exist in various places all over the globe. The only way to account for their existence is rapid sediment burial as might occur in a sudden water catastrophe. Evolutionary scientists grudgingly accept limited catastrophism in diverse regions at diverse times. The creation model accounts for all this with the worldwide flood of Noah, just a few thousand years ago.

Fossilization Processes

• Fossilization: There are six main fossilization processes. These processes are observable and repeatable under laboratory conditions, if not in nature. Most require water or rapid burial in sediment or both.

• Freezing: This process does not appear to happen now in nature, although numerous animals have been found frozen into fossils. They are preserved in part or whole, even with hair and flesh intact. Most have been found along the northern parts of Siberia and Alaska and include thousands of wooly mammoths, bear, rhinoceros, and other mammals. The sudden change of atmosphere at the start of the Noah flood accounts for almost instant freezing in polar regions which were obviously much more temperate immediately prior to the freezing event. Most scientists agree that the polar regions were once much warmer than they are today.

• Hard Parts: Bones are shells are probably the most common type of fossil. When an animal dies, its soft parts rot away (or are eaten by scavengers) quickly. Bones usually disintegrate relatively quickly unless they get buried by sediments. When such burials happen today it is never observed to happen to large numbers of animals. During burial the animal flesh usually disintegrates before the rock hardens, although some fossils are found with some soft parts evident. Bones are preserved as fossils because the rock hardens before the bones have a chance to disintegrate. The most likely cause of this type of fossilization is a flood. Sediments are pressed with cementing action to solidify relatively quickly after the burial. The numbers and densities of such deposits around the world testify to massive sudden flooding. The uniformitarian model would require hundreds if not thousands of major if local floods trapping thousands of organisms, large and small. The flood of Noah, however, accounts for all such fossils.

• Carbonization: In this process hydrogen and oxygen largely disappear leaving mostly carbon. Coal beds are the most common place to find this type of fossil. Coal has been found in nearly every region of the earth, even Antarctica. Coal is believed to be the end product of metamorphism of tremendous quantities of plant remains. Coal seams vary from a few inches to several feet of depth and may run in alternating layers with other sedimentary rock such as limestone. The density of the coal means either plants morphed into coal over a vast period or there was a vast amount of vegetation buried together suddenly. Alternating layers are explained in the uniformitarian model by saying an area alternated between forest and arid land over vast periods. The catastrophe model explains the layers as the result of shifting currents pushing and pressing accumulations of flood debris into layers. Although we have various peat bogs and the La Brea tar pits with us today, none of these demonstrate examples of coal formation or fossilization by carbonization today.

• Casting: This type of fossil does not leave us the original organism. Sediments cover the animal and harden. The animal inside dissolves. Through leakage of other sediments, as with mineral water into the cavity, the casting is filled and formed. The result is a replica in part or whole of the original animal of one type of sediment encased inside another type of sediment. The cast must be formed quickly with some sort of cementing process. Bodies found in Pompeii are an excellent example of this type of fossil. The volcanic rock covered and quickly cooled to form the cast around the bodies. The bodies themselves eventually rotted and rainwater filled in the casting with sediment to form fossil castings.

• Petrafaction: This process is similar to the casting process. The filling material is typically carried into the casting by underground water carrying minerals. The petrified forests of Yellowstone Park and in Arizona are well known examples of this type of fossilization. As with castings, petrifaction requires very rapid burial and cementing of the mold around the original plant or animal life followed by a period of minerals being carried by water into the void left by the decay of the original organism. The vast petrified forests discovered in these places require a very rapid and large-scale hydraulic (flood) event to bury the quantity of life found there.

• Tracks: Tracks of all sorts of animal life, including humans, become fossils when the soft surface is cemented by powerful hydraulic force where softer sediment covers the harder sediment bearing the tracks. The tracks harden and can later be uncovered when the software sediment is removed. Tracks of all sorts of creatures have been found in fossil beds around the world.

• Water or Time?: Most fossilization methods require a large amount of hydraulic action acting rapidly. The cementing action of sediment takes very little time. The existence of fossils does not, in and of itself, require vast time.

Dinosaurs & Animal Extinction

• Did Dinosaurs Live With Man?: The evolution model says dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago but man did not appear until much later. The creation model says dinosaurs were animals created on (most likely) the sixth day. The creation model says dinosaurs lived at least until the flood of Noah. The requirement of Noah to bring air breathing creatures on the ark would logically require him to have taken two of each main species of dinosaur. Given the dimensions of the ark there’s no plausible reason Noah could not have done this if the animals were juvenile.

• Fossil Record: Dinosaur footprints have been found next to human footprints in the same fossilized riverbed in Texas.

• Biblical Record: The book of Job includes descriptions of great land and water creatures called Behemoth (Job 40:15-24) and Leviathan (Job 41) respectively. In that passage of Job, God is confronting Job’s self-righteous attitude and displaying His own glory in order to humble Job. Among other things Job is shown two what he called Behemoth and Leviathan. Behemoth is described as grazing and having strong loins and powerful belly. Behemoth’s tail is like a cedar, his sinews are knit together, his bones are like tubes of bronze, and his limbs like bars of iron. Behemoth is described as roaming far and wide and having no fear of swamps, mountains, or the Jordan River during the spring floods. God asks Job the rhetorical question, “Can anyone take him by his eyes or pierce his nose with a snare?” This creature is sometimes thought to be an elephant or rhinoceros, but those animals do not have great tails. They don’t wade through floods. They prefer to graze on plains. Although these are fearsome beasts, God called Behemoth first or foremost of his great animal creations. It seems far more likely that Job saw what we would call a bracheasaur or brontosaur. Leviathan is similarly fearsome and untamable, except that Leviathan is described as living in the sea. Leviathan has rows of teeth, tight rows of shields along his back, he sneezes light and breathes fire, has a great neck, and he is difficult if not impossible to capture or kill. This passage is sometimes thought to be the source (or product) of sea dragon myths. Some dinosaurs are known to have lived in the sea, such as plesiosaur. The matter of breathing fire at first sounds entirely contrived, but it may not be so far fetched as one might imagine. There are nearly 500 species of fish that give off electric charge or emit a phosphorescent glow. Some reptiles and numerous sea creatures are known to store venom and other toxins in their bodies, including certain types of oils. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that a creature could have existed once that combined electric charge with an abundant oil producing gland to “sneeze sparks.”

• Other Ancient Records: Around the world there are museum displays of ancient art depicting hunting of animals that do not have modern parallels, but do appear to be various types of dinosaurs. Most such artwork is very ancient, dating to the first several centuries after the Flood of Noah. Most well known are Chinese depictions of fire-breathing dragons.

• Contemporary Dinosaurs: Only a handful of reptile species exist today. Gila monster is one example of a modern dinosaur which survives in relatively small numbers in Asia today. Like crocodiles and alligators, they require a very warm climate. Besides the obvious hunting, the post-flood climate was probably the chief cause Dinosaurs did not survive in high enough numbers to avoid extinction. Even so, there is room to speculate that a few species may yet roam undiscovered and uncatalogued in remote places. It has long been speculated that the Loch Ness monster is some sort of plesiosaur and not just the imagination of some inebriated Scots.

• Extinction Rate: Species have become endangered and extinct at an alarming rate for as long as data on the subject has been collected. No new species has been seen evolving into existence in all that time. Either the uniformitarian model does not match the evolutionary model or both are wrong.

Geologic Record

• Cement: Sedimentary rock, such as limestone, sandstone, and dolomite are not being generated in any significant way today, if at all. There is no known process to generate dolomite in nature today. These types of rock require water, sedimentary minerals, and cementing agents. The hardening process is very much like common cement. Limestone, for example, can only be created through a cementing process. Such action requires water and sediment. A heterogeneous mixture of limestone almost certainly must be laid down and cemented at one time. Layers are used to indicate breaks in evolutionary ages. The problem is the nature of the layer interfaces between types of sediment. Such surfaces should show a sort of smoothness where one layer has completely dried. Smooth layer breaks are almost never found in nature. Instead ripple-like breaks are often found between sedimentary rock layers. This sort of interface suggests a rapid depositing of layers by a flood of rushing sediment pouring in and swirling as currents shifted, ebbed, and flowed.

• Carbon: Organic life is carbon based. Coal and oil are called fossil fuels because the deposits are both almost entirely carbon. It is believed the hydrogen and oxygen are leached out leaving liquid oil or solid coal. Scientists believe oil and coal are created by burial of organic material followed by intense pressure for an extended period. Huge amounts of fossils, particularly of vegetation, are often found in coal seams. The types and distribution of fossils make it likely huge amounts of plant life (with some animal life) were suddenly hurled together like debris and buried. A great pressure, such as is found beneath thousands of feet of seawater, could have easily provide the force to compact the organic material. Porous sediments initially laid down over the organic material would have provided a means to filter the hydrogen, oxygen and various other minerals out of the organic material leaving very little but carbon. The Genesis flood would have provided an ample mechanism to create the coal beds and oil deposits found all around the world. No process is being observed in nature today to create coal or oil, even in the rare but active peat bogs of Scotland or tar pits in California.

• Asteroids: Evolutionists suggest many fossils were generated by a catastrophe such as an asteroid impact. While we know earth has been struck by asteroids and certainly some fossils may have resulted from these events, by far most of the world’s fossils must have been generated quickly and with conditions which could only be attained by rapid burial and great hydraulic force. The flood in the Creation model is the only catastrophe which could account for both the great quantity of fossils and their distribution.

• Ripples: The mechanism for forming fossilized tracks is also the only way detailed surface features like ripples and droplets in sedimentary rock layers can be explained. Most sedimentary rocks have vivid surface features where layers of rock interface. Rapid burial is the only reasonable explanation.

Anthropology

• Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon, Homo-Erectus…: Much has been made of a relatively small pool of fossilized humans. Various names have been given to them, and there are certain distinctions, but they are all within the range of modern human norms. Models fashioned for display in the temples of evolutionary science (museums) convince the general public that these early people were a brutish lot with long arms and flat foreheads. Never mind that there’s really nothing odd at all about most bones from these people. Some do show evidence more likely the result of disease, perhaps rickets or arthritis, but nothing so odd as gorilla arms or strangely shaped chests. The biblical account offers the clue that many of those who lived before the great flood reached ages of several hundred years. Since no one today lives that long it is difficult to say with any great accuracy how great age would affect bone structure, but computer modeling suggests it would cause a certain amount of compression in parts of the skull including the jaw, face, and forehead. Fossil remains of early humans, like many other creatures, are often found relatively close together. This suggests those early people lived in groups much the way we organize ourselves today into cities and towns. Perhaps the elderly lived in their own communities just as they do today.

• Races: Humanity is generally broken into three main racial groups and various subgroups beyond that. We know that regardless of race, human is human. DNA evidence suggests all humans alive today can be traced to one genetic Eve. Race, then, is a distinction which came some time later. Evolutionists suggests adaptation by natural selection. This may have some merit on the “micro” scale. There is no difference in the amount of genetic information between people of different races. Interestingly, there were three children of Noah on the ark who repopulated the earth after the flood. The bible indicates they eventually spread out in different directions. Different climate, diet and other factors are known to cause superficial changes over several generations. Inbreeding within a group over a period of time also tends to reduce genetic variety and accentuate some traits over others, such as hair color, eye color or nose shape. The same concept applies to developing various breeds of other creatures like dogs, cats, and so forth. Often more variety of breeds are found in domestic animal species than in wild animals. Animal husbandry practiced by humans exercising dominion over domestic animals is the most likely reason. The evolution model suggests a spectrum of breeds should exist of all animal species, even blurring to the point of eliminating barriers between species. Once again we find the predictions of the creation model more accurately fit what we observe than do the predictions of the evolution model.

• Cavemen: People once lived in caves. A few still do. This has more to do with being social outcasts than being of inferior intelligence. Genesis 11:1-9 records one of the most spectacularly miraculous divine interventions into the affairs of mankind since the flood. This event, the division of language and the resulting dispersion of humanity, provides a better explanation of early anthropology than nearly any evolution-based theory ever put forward. God divided the languages at the tower of Babel less than two centuries after the biblical flood. The people immediately began to spread out from lower Mesopotamia. The weak were undoubted pushed further and further away by fear and the inability to communicate effectively. Some undoubtedly took refuge in distant caves until they could build large enough families to confidently establish their “tribe” in a particular place.

• Cultural and Social Evolution: The individuals or families who fled Babel took with whatever knowledge they had acquired prior to the event. Since they could not communicate effectively with one another, the knowledge they had is what they took with them. The same people who were driven furthest and fastest were probably also the most poorly equipped intellectually. Those who had the most knowledge would be most effectively capable of holding their ground. This is probably the most compelling explanation as to why Mesopotamia is considered the cradle of civilization and why many of the people groups furthest away, like some of the remote tribes in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are the least developed “native” peoples. The evolutionary model does not present any compelling explanation of the hundreds of languages spoken today, nor why language is often associated with social development.

• Common Myths: Myths of a great flood or patriarchs who lived unusually long lives (or both) have been reported in dozens of isolated tribal groups from all around the world. While it has been suggested that these reports have been tainted by early missionary visitors to some of these cultures, the quantity and veracity of these stories suggests there is more to them than merely similar mythology. The most well known ancient flood myth is probably the Gilgamesh epic written within a few centuries of the Torah. Although the stories are superficially similar, the biblical account describes a ship that was actually sea worthy and capable of holding the cargo required. The ship described in the Gilgamesh epic would be impossible to keep afloat in the heavy seas of a violent open ocean. If language evolved differently based on geography, myths should have evolved differently as well.

• Pyramids: The pyramids of Egypt are the most well known, but similar ancient structures exist other continents. The similarity of design suggests the design itself predates the division of language at Babel. The tower of Babel probably was a form of pyramid. After this the people who migrated to and settled Upper Egypt built their own pyramids. Others built pyramid structures as far away as China. Those who settled Central America also built strikingly similar structures. They may have been Nabetian sailors or passengers on their ships who crossed the Pacific nearly 4000 years ago. The similarity of these designs makes it highly likely there was at least some contact at some point between these cultures long before widespread intercontinental travel is supposed to have taken place.