Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Lie?
Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 1 of 2 (469123)
06-03-2008 11:19 PM


Why Lie?
If evolution is such a sound science, why are there so many forgeries? It seems that one lie on top of another, is piled up in our science textbooks. I notice how huge a headline is when a new so called discovery is made, but when it turns out to be a fraud, or a mistake, it takes sometimes decades to for it to work its way out of the textbooks and for the scientific community to acknowledge it. I am going to cite a few examples.
Piltdown man: In Sussex England in 1912, a fossil of what was to be called the second most important fossil of the evolution of man, was found in a gravel pit. Some 41 years later the skull was found to be of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the appearance of age and the teeth had been filed down.
Orce man: Hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe, said to belong to a 17 year old man who lived 1.6 million years ago. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had very detailed drawings done to represent what he would have looked like, and of course, it looks like an intermediary.
Ardilipithecus Ramidus: One tooth? Exactly where this primitive species belongs and whether it walked upright is unknown. How can this even be a part of the fossil record that proves we evolved from a common ancestor?
Australopithecus Afarensis or “Lucy”. A couple teeth, cheekbone fragments, and an incomplete skeleton with no hands or feet bones found, yet they have a full display in the St. Louis Zoo with human feet and hands walking upright. If there is no proof of this, why the elaborate display? Why try to prove what isn’t there? There is much controversy surrounding this “missing link”.
Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis: A fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate. National Geographic was all over this discovery, but when it was found to be a fraud, it seemed like a quite little uh-oh on the back pages. I was at the Museum of Natural History just last year and they still have the banner of Archaeoraptor hanging outside. WHY?
What about Haekel’s embyoes? He was called a fraud in 1874 and it took until 1998 to update some biology textbooks to reflect the truth. It only took 124 years to correct this. I guess in the millions of years of evolution, this isn’t much time.
With so many frauds, the evolutionary family tree is thinning of the fossil evidence necessary to give credence to their theories.
There are many more.
My question is why? Why the fraud? Why the lies? I find it hard to believe that scientist can be so pure at heart that they always stay objective and never let money or fame influence their findings.
I ask again....why lie?

Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 2 (469157)
06-04-2008 8:14 AM


Thread copied to the Why Lie? thread in the Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024