Why Lie? (Re: Evolution frauds and hoaxes)

Which one? The one in NYC? And by last year do you mean May 2005-January-2006?Was it this banner? From your paleontological standpoint is that an example of the fraudulent Archaeoraptor liaoningensis under discussion? Or is it a rendition of a valid avian dinosaur? Which one? Do you know or are you just parroting AiG claims? I'm thinking the latter since you claimed to have visited this museum last year and seen the banner with your own eyes when it has been well over 2 years since that exhibit was up and Archaeoraptor isn't mentioned on the banner. I live in NYC and went to the AMNH multiple times to see that exhibit and don't remember seeing anything about Archaeoraptor.Why do you feel the need to lie? If you have a problem with the whole "bird to dinosaur" idea, then why don't you just say that (and explain to us exactly why) instead of making false claims about a respectable museum? Because National Geographic (while they do publish some wonderful and enlightening articles) exists to sell magazines. They can have a tendency to sensationalize some of the science to make it more interesting to the lay public, although they usually do a lot better job than many of the other pop-sci magazines. According to TalkOrigins, "[t]he main author of the article about it was National Geographic's art editor, not a scientist. Nature and Science both rejected papers describing it, citing suspicions that it was doctored and illegally smuggled (Dalton 2000; Simons 2000). Normal scientific procedures worked to uphold high standards."The relevant scientists had not yet been able to examine the fossils as it had traded hands from a private seller (not a paleontologist, but an unscrupulous "fossil hunter") to a private collector. National Geographic indeed jumped the gun, but, as soon as the specimen came to the attention of scientists who could tell the difference, the forgery was exposed. What is your seemingly extreme problem with how this went down? You make it seem like scientists are conspiring to fool the public, but they are the only ones who have EVER exposed any frauds. Why would they do that if they are so keen to pull the wool over everyone's eyes? You see (and others have said this, but it bears repeating as many times as necessary), the problem with this scenario is that it is really easy for other scientists to find out about fraudulent evidence. And when that happens, the person or "foundation" who perpetrated the fraud are stripped of their grants, positions and all of their credibility. They will never be able to do science again! Wherever did you get the idea that scientists voted?

---

"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea

I appreciate that you got a second opinion from your wife, but she either got the date wrong or you are not telling the truth. There were no special dinosaur exhibitions in November of 2006 (as you can see here ). The most recent dinosaur exhibit was the one corresponding to the banner I displayed. As there were no special dinosaur exhibitions of any kind in November of 2006 and the AMNH does not put up banners advertising their permanent exhibition (in which one cannot find any trace of Archaeoraptor, past or present), I am inclined to go for the latter explanation.Again, I also have my own testimony as a frequent visitor to the AMNH (at least twice a month) in addition to the link to past exhibitions I provided above. I remember no reference to Archaeoraptor (and I definitely would have noticed it because I am an avid reader of Nat'l Geographic and clearly remember the debacle).{ABE: There is also no way that the AMNH would have had risked displaying a known fraud. They are one of the most prestigious science museums in the world and their paleontologists would have most definitely been aware of the brouhaha surrounding Archaeoraptor. You may have convinced yourself you saw the word "Archaeoraptor" on a banner outside the AMNH, but I don't think you actually did.}What about the rest of my post? Anything to say about that?Edited by Jaderis, : No reason given.

---

"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea