Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Lie? (Re: Evolution frauds and hoaxes)
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 316 of 346 (471680)
06-17-2008 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 304 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 5:18 PM


Misleading Flea, with a misleading O.P.!!
misleading Flea writes:
I did it GF! Welcome to the fray!
The trouble with taking your mistakes out of the O.P. is that you can distort the entire thread, as people were replying to the original. But while you're at it, there's plenty more that's wrong with it. For example, you've still got this in there:
misleading Flea writes:
I was at the Museum of Natural History just last year and they still have the banner of Archaeoraptor hanging outside. WHY?
And this:
misleading Flea writes:
With so many frauds, the evolutionary family tree is thinning of the fossil evidence necessary to give credence to their theories.
When more than 99.99% of the fossil evidence remains.
And this:
Mis.Flea writes:
There are many more.
Where the word "more" refers to the word "frauds" in the quote above, and you're so shy about listing these many frauds (not mistakes, frauds).
Why not just be honest, and admit that it was a pretty silly mistake-ridden O.P., full of misleading claims, and that your "why lie?" phrase might have been better applied to the creationist sites where you got all these ideas in the first place? (We know you did 'cos we've seen all your claims before, except the N.Y. museum one).
Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 5:18 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:03 PM bluegenes has replied

Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 317 of 346 (471683)
06-17-2008 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 305 by Alasdair
06-17-2008 5:18 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
Also, what missing link?
“The discovery was greeted with much enthusiasm by evolutionists the world over because it appeared to bridge the gap between the putative hominid line of ancestors (including the australopithecines and Homo habilis) and the decidedly more humanlike fossils designated Homo erectus.” - me (or a bastardization of some website)
This would be considered a missing link or “to bridge the gap”.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 305 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 5:18 PM Alasdair has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 319 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 6:04 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 318 of 346 (471685)
06-17-2008 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 316 by bluegenes
06-17-2008 5:54 PM


Re: Misleading Flea, with a misleading O.P.!!
Oh hey Bluegenes!
Im so sorry, I have no photographs, or proof of any banners hanging in the Museum. I only have a memory. So Im sorry, but you can call me a "fraud" or a "rampant overstated speculationist" if you like. I can't prove it, so disregard.
PEACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by bluegenes, posted 06-17-2008 5:54 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 6:07 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 324 by bluegenes, posted 06-17-2008 6:21 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5749 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 319 of 346 (471686)
06-17-2008 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 5:59 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
http://www.talkorigins.org/...mdesc/images/hominids2_big.jpg
D and E are homo habilis. G is a homo erectus. I don't really see much of a "missing link" here. Do you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 5:59 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5749 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 320 of 346 (471688)
06-17-2008 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 6:03 PM


Re: Misleading Flea, with a misleading O.P.!!
Well you have done a good job of "overly speculating" and "fraud" by twisting the following scenarios into frauds by scientists:
1) 80 years ago, a scientist finds a tooth and speculates it belongs to a hominid. This is debunked by the scientific community 3 years later.
2) An hobbyist archaeologist comes into possession of a fake fossil. He refuses to show it to the scientific community, except for drawings. It is later debunked by the scientific community.
3) Two scientists argue over the details of hominid's recent evolutionary development.
Where is the fraud?
The closest I'm seeing is you being the fraud in twisting these scenarios so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:03 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:41 PM Alasdair has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 321 of 346 (471689)
06-17-2008 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 309 by ramoss
06-17-2008 5:36 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
Without rehashing all the details of the peppered-moth saga, keep in mind it's not really evidence for evolution as it's just variation within a species. I could get into the flaws and there is a thread here somewhere on it, but the biggest flaw is the idea that merely showing natural selection and adaption is significant evidence for ToE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by ramoss, posted 06-17-2008 5:36 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by Coyote, posted 06-17-2008 6:19 PM randman has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 322 of 346 (471690)
06-17-2008 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by grandfather raven
06-17-2008 5:50 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
no, it was DbaFlea's claim that the fossils HE listed WERE, and ARE STILL, being used as SPECIFIC evidence for evolution.
Really? The comment was actually:
The problem is, DbaF, these fossil findings had nothing to do with "proving" evolution, and were never presented as such.
The vast majority of evolutionary theory's evidence has nothing to do with fossils.
This was in response to a discussion on Leakey's discoveries and dating. I don't think then you are correct, and yes, he did make a point to comment on fossils in general as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by grandfather raven, posted 06-17-2008 5:50 PM grandfather raven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by grandfather raven, posted 06-17-2008 6:25 PM randman has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 323 of 346 (471691)
06-17-2008 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by randman
06-17-2008 6:08 PM


Variation within a species
Without rehashing all the details of the peppered-moth saga, keep in mind it's not really evidence for evolution as it's just variation within a species. I could get into the flaws and there is a thread here somewhere on it, but the biggest flaw is the idea that merely showing natural selection and adaption is significant evidence for ToE.
And can you specify the mechanism that prevents that variation from growing through time until the subsequent species is different from the parent species?
If there is such a mechanism I have yet to have a creationist specify it in detail -- they just claim that such variation has a limit and hope nobody will call them on it.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by randman, posted 06-17-2008 6:08 PM randman has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 324 of 346 (471692)
06-17-2008 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 6:03 PM


Flea writes:
Oh hey Bluegenes!
Im so sorry, I have no photographs, or proof of any banners hanging in the Museum. I only have a memory. So Im sorry, but you can call me a "fraud" or a "rampant overstated speculationist" if you like. I can't prove it, so disregard.
Not even quite the latter. Mistaken, I suspect.
PEACE!
Peace, indeed. But don't you realise that your O.P. was a lot of noise about trivia. Scientists making mistakes is a problem 1000 times bigger than any deliberate forgeries or frauds.
Because there's no evidence for creationism of any kind, the creationists need to make mountains out of molehills in order to give the impression that there's some kind of Satanic conspiracy to drag people away from the great "truths" of Jewish mythology.
In fact, biologists think evolution is the story of life on earth because that's the way the evidence looks to them. If you disagree, fine, but if you're getting your information from sources based on superstition and desire, then you might be getting a distorted picture.
One way of avoiding this is to read actual research papers that are nothing directly to do with the evolution/creation debate. Use google scholar, search for things you're interested in, read the peer reviewed literature, and learn.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:03 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

grandfather raven
Junior Member (Idle past 5445 days)
Posts: 27
From: Alaska, USA
Joined: 11-20-2007


Message 325 of 346 (471693)
06-17-2008 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 322 by randman
06-17-2008 6:18 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
Really? The comment was actually:
The problem is, DbaF, these fossil findings had nothing to do with "proving" evolution, and were never presented as such.
The vast majority of evolutionary theory's evidence has nothing to do with fossils.
you do understand that this is a very different statement than "fossils are not presented as evidence for evolution", right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by randman, posted 06-17-2008 6:18 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:44 PM grandfather raven has not replied

Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 326 of 346 (471695)
06-17-2008 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by Alasdair
06-17-2008 6:07 PM


Re: Misleading Flea, with a misleading O.P.!!
1) 80 years ago, a scientist finds a tooth and speculates it belongs to a hominid. This is debunked by the scientific community 3 years later.
It was discovered in 1922, and used at the Scopes trial in 1925. A nice rendering was done of a one million year old entire race of humanoid by Amedee Forestier who was especially interested in prehistoric man and loved to bring him to life, not by fictitious imaginings but by the most careful reconstructions based on scientific research, and who also drew of all things, Piltdown man.
The same “authorities” who “debunked” the discovery at one time, (even a short time) endorsed an entire race of humanity out of one pig’s tooth.
Surely, there is a lesson here for us concerning the reliability of so-called "expert testimony," which is so often used to manipulate and intimidate the layman.
2) An hobbyist archaeologist comes into possession of a fake fossil. He refuses to show it to the scientific community, except for drawings. It is later debunked by the scientific community.
What are you referring to here? Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis?
3) Two scientists argue over the details of hominid's recent evolutionary development.
And what is this? Is this KNM-ER 1470?
You have to be a little more specific, unfortunatly, we have not "evolved" telepathic powers yet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 6:07 PM Alasdair has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 6:47 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 332 by grandfather raven, posted 06-17-2008 6:50 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 338 by ramoss, posted 06-17-2008 8:03 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 343 by RAZD, posted 06-17-2008 8:58 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3442 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 327 of 346 (471697)
06-17-2008 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 2:38 PM


Re: Flea bitten
Hiya,
quote:
I am not angry at anyone. I am simply questioning.
The issue isn't your emotional state.
It's your dishonest and biased behaviour.
You complained about frauds in science, then present fraudulent creationist information to try and back it up !
The question you were asked is clear :
Why are you not angry at the creationist websites that gave you information about Nebraska man for misrepresenting the scientific community's opinions on the incident, and its significance?
You presented false information, which you got from a creationist site - while (wrongly) arguing evolution is based on false information.
How dishonest is that!
Why can't you answer the question?
How do you explain the falsehoods of creationist websites that gave you information about Nebraska man misrepresenting the scientific community's opinions on the incident, and its significance?
Furthermore -
you claimed there were many frauds etc.,
but have failed to add ANY to our tiny and well-known list.
You were challenged to come up with five - why can't you?
Iasion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 2:38 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 329 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:46 PM Kapyong has not replied

Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 328 of 346 (471698)
06-17-2008 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 325 by grandfather raven
06-17-2008 6:25 PM


Re: Five forged fossils
Your kidding right? So evolution does not need the fossil record to prove anything....OK...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by grandfather raven, posted 06-17-2008 6:25 PM grandfather raven has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by Alasdair, posted 06-17-2008 6:49 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Dont Be a Flea
Member (Idle past 5762 days)
Posts: 79
From: Merritt Island FL
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 329 of 346 (471699)
06-17-2008 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 327 by Kapyong
06-17-2008 6:44 PM


Re: Flea bitten
KNM-ER 1470? Anyone? Bueller?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by Kapyong, posted 06-17-2008 6:44 PM Kapyong has not replied

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5749 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 330 of 346 (471700)
06-17-2008 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 326 by Dont Be a Flea
06-17-2008 6:41 PM


Re: Misleading Flea, with a misleading O.P.!!
It was discovered in 1922, and used at the Scopes trial in 1925. A nice rendering was done of a one million year old entire race of humanoid by Amedee Forestier who was especially interested in prehistoric man and loved to bring him to life, not by fictitious imaginings but by the most careful reconstructions based on scientific research, and who also drew of all things, Piltdown man.
The same “authorities” who “debunked” the discovery at one time, (even a short time) endorsed an entire race of humanity out of one pig’s tooth.
Surely, there is a lesson here for us concerning the reliability of so-called "expert testimony," which is so often used to manipulate and intimidate the layman.
Present your resources that show that Nebraska Man was used at the Scopes Trial.
Present your resources that the scientific community endorsed an entire race of humans out of the single tooth.
Present your resources that the illustration of the Nebraska "man" ever had relevance outside of a picture in a science magazine.
We've been over this. I have shown how this is all wrong. Now you are not ignorant. You are lying. Prove me wrong and present resources for each of the above points.
What are you referring to here? Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis?
Piltdown man.
And what is this? Is this KNM-ER 1470?
Yes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-17-2008 6:41 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024