Starting with the Sumerians [...] every culture accepted for a fact that heavenly beings (Or Gods) had created Man kind - homosapiens- Some
coincidence to be a "myth".
This is deceptive; subsequent cultures proliferated the same ideas simply because they borrowed from each other and borrowed from the belief systems
before. Christianity does this with the various sun-god stories about virgin births, sacrifice and resurrection. They all follow the same pattern
simply because cultures are borne of those beforehand. Non-coincidental indeed.
At any rate, a popular belief DOES NOT constitute a correct or accurate one. Neither does a historically older one.
Evolution cannot account for the appearance of *Homo sapiens*, which happened virtually overnight instead of the millions of years evolution
Evolutionary theory can account for the appearance of Homo Sapiens. The rate of speciation within a genus does not necessarily take millions of years;
it depends on the rate of mutation, the rate of selection, environmental changes and competiton. As such, it does not follow a timetable; evolution
does not plan ahead.
At any rate, the genus Homo appeared about 2 million years ago (as I recall, anyway), of which Homo Sapiens is only one of many (now extinct) species.
There are known species that emerged after Erectus and before Sapiens, including H. Floresiensis, H. Heidelbergensis and H. Neanderthalensis - which
shows, if anything, that the rate of speciation was pretty explosive.
with no evidence of earlier stages that would indicate a gradual change from *Homo erectus*
The assumption that H.Sapiens evolved from H.Erectus is one of two main rivalling theories. The dominant theory right now, as I understand it, is that
H.Sapiens speciated in Africa and subsequently replaced
H.Erectus and H.Neanderthalensis. The model you appear to work from is one that states
H.Sapiens evolved from an existing widespread species, in this case H.Erectus.
Since there isn't much fossil evidence to say if this is true, it is worth noting that studies of mitochondrial (maternal) DNA and Y-chromosome
(paternal) DNA both appear to support a more recent emergence of H.Sapiens in Africa. This still states that H.Sapiens is a recent event, as you
mentioned, but nobody else sees this as a problem, because evolution isn't stuck to a timetable. It is accepted that we are a young species.
He appeared inexplicably some 300,000 years ago, millions of years too soon.
Again, I question where you are getting your evolutionary timetable from. Too soon? Says who?
The scholars have no explanation. The Sumerians and Babylonian texts do, the Old Testament does. *Homo sapiens*-- modern man-- was brought about by
the ancient gods
You question the emergence of H.Sapiens based on a lack of fossil evidence showing gradual changes from H.Erectus - but you are willing to accept that
an ancient civilization used a "God of the Gaps" argument with no other evidence than Sumerian mythology and stories? This galls me somewhat.
Former CIA official Victor Marchetti spelled out indirectly in 1979 "We have, indeed, been contacted......and the U.S. government, in collusion with
other national powers of the Earth, is determined to keep this information from the general public".
This is irrelevant to human evolution, and you have presented this erroneous item to support an equally erroneous assumption:
The ancient accounts tell us that these hybrid bloodlines, the fusion of the genes of selected humans with those of the "gods", were put into the
positions of ruling royal power,
"God" are the aliens
You have no evidence for this claim, and it is not the product of any obvious logical progression. To conclude, evolution is the best supported
explanation of H.Sapiens we have so far.