The theory that mankind does not evolve, but rather devolve, has been formulated by quite a number of people. I do not know whom you are referring to. This theory is considered non scientific by mainstream science. Here some views about it: 1) "In common parlance, "devolution" is the notion a species may evolve into more "primitive" forms. From a scientific perspective, devolution does not exist. Lay people may see evolution as "progress", reflecting the 19th century ideas of Lamarckism and orthogenesis, but modern genetically-based biological evolution theory asserts that evolution occurs by such mechanisms as natural selection , genetic drift, and mutation, and is therefore not directional, forward or backward in time; hence "devolution" is not a valid concept." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_devolution 2) "Please reference for me a bacteria, as you mention, that has GAINED information in its DNA that has produced any beneficial new capability. Scientists have modified bacterial DNA strands, but none have survived these new characteristics. So, "Science" has yet to describe ONE example where a bacteria has gained new information that it didn't have before." "Recently I have received 2 emails recommending that I check out the Answers in Genesis site. I am quite familiar with that organization, having once been a big supporter of them when I was a creationist. They have an impresive website, with lots of scientific-looking arguments defending young earth creation. But we must be careful not to confuse scientific-looking arguments with science. There is a big diffference." http://mindsetfree.blogspot.com/2006/11/answers-in-genesis.html 3) "On the other hand, cultural devolution can be shown to have occurred many times in history. To summarize this situation, we may see that progress has only taken place in the mainstream, in those cultures which derived their inspiration and renewed it from time to time from the initial explosive development which was the subject of the first part of this paper. The moment any culture broke contact, its history thereafter tended to be characterized by the loss of old elements rather than the gain of new ones." Source: Genesis and Early Man: Part II. Chapter 3 "Cultural Degeneration" http://www.custance.org/old/earlyman/2ch3.html 4) "how, after 50,000 years of successful evolution, involving discovery of all the other abilities which are usually perceived as CAUSES of evolution (fire, the wheel, language, social structure, religion), after the establishing of the large Agri-Cultures, and towns and cities, and cooperative empires where the spiritual life remained central, how, after all this, did we .Fall. into the .Dark Ages. and eventually get to the terribly fragmented, schizophrenic, alienated, ruthlessly competitive, super-violent, planet-destructive, terrorist-threatened, hi-testosterone, disintegrating aftermath of the Big Lie in which we find ourselves today?" Source: http://www.parallel-youniversity.com/emag/up232.html