Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

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


Message 1 of 346 (469124)
06-03-2008 11:19 PM


Why Lie?
If evolution is such a sound science, why are there such rampant overstated speculations? It seems that one misrepresentation 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 rampant overstated speculations? 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?
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added the "(Re: Evolution frauds and hoaxes)" to the topic title.
Edited by Dont Be a Flea, : Just to make everyone happy, I am replacing the word "forgeries" with "rampant overstated speculation"

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by The Matt, posted 06-04-2008 8:40 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 4 by Stile, posted 06-04-2008 8:54 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 5 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2008 9:37 AM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 6 by Percy, posted 06-04-2008 9:54 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 7 by Rahvin, posted 06-04-2008 10:39 AM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 9 by Wumpini, posted 06-04-2008 11:04 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 10 by Coyote, posted 06-04-2008 11:04 AM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 11 by AZPaul3, posted 06-04-2008 11:20 AM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 69 by Dont Be a Flea, posted 06-05-2008 9:13 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 150 by randman, posted 06-10-2008 1:09 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 8 of 346 (469173)
06-04-2008 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Dr Adequate
06-04-2008 9:37 AM


Dr Adequate is in the house!
Thanks for your reply Doc,
I am not arguing anything that has to do with creation or ID. My point is more, if it happened in the past, it more than likely is still happening. A great example would be Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis. Its still hanging around even though it is a huge fraud. I don’t know who to trust. I am not going to blindly accept what a “scientist” says just because he is a scientist. If they forged evidence before for financial or political gain, they are still doing it. Remember Doc, I am talking about lies in evolution, not the validity of creation or ID.
In response to your statement “there aren’t”, I would disagree wholeheartedly. They find fossils and assign assumptions without the full picture. “Lucy” for example, who has no hands or feet bones but is claimed to walk upright. They have no proof of this, so why commission a museum to build a half man, half ape model for the world to ogle at when they have no proof only assumptions. Anthropologist argue that Lucy is no more than a primate knuckle dragger. To me, this is a false representation of the evidence to support their theory. Its no better than a lie or a forgery.
Why make displays and draw pictures of entire races of intermediaries that are merely fragmented incomplete fossils, for the laymen to misunderstand and just “believe” what they are told. I think these are calculated moves, done deliberately to insure further funding for their studies.
PEACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2008 9:37 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by bluegenes, posted 06-04-2008 12:16 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 16 by Larni, posted 06-04-2008 1:31 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 44 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 2:54 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 56 by Rrhain, posted 06-05-2008 6:59 AM 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 12 of 346 (469180)
06-04-2008 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Rahvin
06-04-2008 10:39 AM


Rahvin
Thanks for responding.
I beg to differ, anytime you put the title “missing link” on something, it becomes “evidence” for evolution.
Look how long Haekle’s embryos were in science textbooks for the up and coming students to just “believe” in. How long will Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis hang around in the mainstream before it is completely removed. Remember, I just saw a banner hanging in the Museum of Natural History last year! Its FAKE! Remove it. How long is fake Lucy going to be on display? How long are pictures of Piltdown man going to be around? The list goes on. Anthropologist are butting heads with paleontologists all the time on whether or not certain fossils are “human” or “ape” or “intermediary”, yet to insure public attention and funding, they roll with controversial evidence.
Out of the “millions” of fossils found, how many actually support macro-evolution and how many are just incomplete bone fragments? There are a lot of assumptions made based on a single tooth, a footprint or one leg bone.
PEACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Rahvin, posted 06-04-2008 10:39 AM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Rahvin, posted 06-04-2008 2:37 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 45 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 3:11 AM 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 13 of 346 (469182)
06-04-2008 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by AZPaul3
06-04-2008 11:20 AM


I appreciate your reply, AZPaul3.
This thread however has nothing to do with creation or Intelligent design. It has to do with lies in evolution. Please stick to the topic and not try to take us down a rabbit hole. I was looking for defense of what you believe not an attack at what others may believe. We can post up another thread on creation or ID somewhere else. Besides, arguing what may be lies in creation or ID does not erase them from evolution.
PEACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by AZPaul3, posted 06-04-2008 11:20 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 3:19 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 58 by AZPaul3, posted 06-05-2008 10:50 AM 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 15 of 346 (469194)
06-04-2008 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by bluegenes
06-04-2008 12:16 PM


Re: Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis.
Hey Bluegenes, great to hear from you again
In response to Archaeoroaptor
This story is actually the story of how a good Chinese scientist exposed a fraud by a Chinese farmer as soon as he got a chance to examine the fossil (or fossils, as it was made up of two).
An interesting fraud case, but that's all.
Then why was the banner still hanging in the Museum of Natural History last year? Why was National Geographic so anxious to publish this find?
He should present evidence for his claims, and the evidence should be reviewed by other experts in his field whom he has not chosen, and even then, you do not accept it as probable fact unless it's been confirmed by other routes, and even then, it's only tentative.
I would love to believe that this is how it actually happens, but I find it hard. It seems more likely that whatever evidence would further a foundations’ funding would be more acceptable. I know this is a pretty tuff accusation, but I see it in the cases that I presented.
I see pictures of Velociraptor with feathers now. WHY? There is no hard evidence supporting a Velociraptor having feathers! They lack quill knobs and feathers do not fossilize. The same exists with Gigantoraptor. It is suggested that the POSSIBILITY exists, so now all Velociraptor and Gigantoraptor pictures have feathers to prove what . that Dinosaurs “evolved” into birds. That dinos and birds have a common ancestor? This is using assumption not true science to further the proof of evolution. This IS INDEED fooling the public.
Or is it that you desire evolution to be a fraud? Try being honest with yourself on that one, as we're talking about lies on this thread, aren't we?
Honestly Bluegenes, I find a plethora of holes, deception and lies in Darwinian evolution or “macro” evolution. It makes it hard for me to believe in any of it. How in the heck are we to believe the validity of claims and data, from a group of scientists voting on what other groups of scientists claim to have found? Sounds more like politics to me!
Edited by Dont Be a Flea, : Just needed to add one more little thing!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by bluegenes, posted 06-04-2008 12:16 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 1:35 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 27 by PaulK, posted 06-04-2008 2:38 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 28 by bluegenes, posted 06-04-2008 2:44 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 38 by Jaderis, posted 06-04-2008 7:12 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 48 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 3:33 AM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 60 by Percy, posted 06-05-2008 12:28 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 19 of 346 (469198)
06-04-2008 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Coyote
06-04-2008 11:04 AM


Hey Coyote, Ever heard of this?
Ota Benga was captured in 1904 by an evolutionist researcher and business man named Samuel Phillips Verner. In the Congo. In his own tongue, his name meant "friend". He had a wife and two children. Verner was sent to Africa in under contract from the St. Louis World's Fair to bring back pygmies for exhibition. Verner met Ota Benga in the Belgian Congo that year and negotiated with a tribal slave trader for the pygmies, returning to the United States with Ota Benga and eight others.
The factors motivating Verner to bring Ota Benga to the United States were complex, but he was evidently much influenced by the theory of Charles Darwin, which led to the division of humankind into contrived races. A contemporary account stated that Benga was 'not much taller than an orangutan and their heads are much alike, and both grin in the same way when pleased'.
Chained and caged like an animal, he was taken to the USA where evolutionist scientists displayed him to the public in the St Louis World Fair along with other ape species and introduced him as "the closest transitional link to man".
Two years later, he was taken to the Bronx Zoo in New York and there they exhibited him under the denomination of "ancient ancestors of man" along with a few chimpanzees, a gorilla named Dinah, and an orangutan called Dohung.
Dr William T. Hornaday, the zoo's director gave long speeches on how proud he was to have this exceptional "transitional form" in his zoo.
On March 20, 1916, at the age of 32, he built a ceremonial fire, chipped off the caps on his teeth, performed a final tribal dance, and shot himself in the heart with a stolen pistol.
http://www.onehumanrace.com/docs/ota_benga.asp
Ota Benga - Wikipedia
TurnPike Web Hosting Services and E-Commerce Solutions by Crystal Lust
So, the fledgling theory of evolution in the early 1900’s was furthered as fact at the expense of the life on a human being claimed to be an intermediary link between man and ape to prove Darwinian evolution. I would say that this is a public fraud as thousands of people came and believed that Ota Benga was indeed an intermediary species and proof of the evolution of man from apes.
Thats one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Coyote, posted 06-04-2008 11:04 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 2:06 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 29 by Coyote, posted 06-04-2008 2:45 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 49 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 3:43 AM 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 21 of 346 (469200)
06-04-2008 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Brian
06-04-2008 1:35 PM


Hey Brian
I love the avatar!
Well, then why have this forum? Why post up. Why argue, just believe what you believe and keep it to yourself.
How BORRING!
No thanks, lets argue more!
HAHA
PEACE!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 1:35 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 2:14 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied

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


Message 22 of 346 (469201)
06-04-2008 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Larni
06-04-2008 1:31 PM


Hey thanks Larni!
“I want them alive, no disintegrations!!”-Darth Vader
I know this quote has little to do with anything, but I was influenced by you to post it up...Im not sure why....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Larni, posted 06-04-2008 1:31 PM Larni has not replied

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


Message 24 of 346 (469204)
06-04-2008 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Brian
06-04-2008 2:06 PM


Apologies Coyote and Brian
CRAAAAAP!!!! Ok, my bad!
Its still an interesting story on how the Darwinian theory of evolution moved into the main stream of acceptance. Could we dig up Ota Benga? eh...nevermind...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 2:06 PM Brian has not replied

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


Message 25 of 346 (469205)
06-04-2008 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Brian
06-04-2008 2:14 PM


Re: Hey Brian
The pursuit of the truth is a noble use of time. I love to hear debate, it’s a passion of mine. To me, its time well spent. It helps me in my own faith in finding the truth. I also enjoy the stimulation of different views on things. Besides, I’m at work, and it looks like I’m working . but . LOL!
You are correct, time is precious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Brian, posted 06-04-2008 2:14 PM Brian has not replied

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


Message 31 of 346 (469214)
06-04-2008 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Coyote
06-04-2008 2:45 PM


Re: Hey Coyote, Ever heard of this?
Did you not see my apology?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Coyote, posted 06-04-2008 2:45 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Coyote, posted 06-04-2008 3:50 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 32 of 346 (469218)
06-04-2008 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by kjsimons
06-04-2008 2:46 PM


Re: Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis.
Dr Alan Feduccia, who is an evolutionist but a critic of the dino to bird theory, sounded a note of caution about the "feathered dinosaurs" in general in an interview with the evolutionary Discover magazine It certainly seems strange that all these specimans come from a single province of China, the same place as the Archaeoraptor hoax came from. The holotype of Microraptor was part of this hoax.
“When we see actual feathers preserved on specimens, we need to carefully determine if we are looking at secondarily flightless birds that have retained feathers and only superficially resemble dinosaurs, or if the specimens are in fact related to dinosaurs. That’s a difficult issue to deal with right now, given the existence of fake fossils”-Dr. Alan Feduccia
Like I said, who can you trust? So much data, so many opinions. Fake fossils out of china. Should we trust anything coming out of China?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by kjsimons, posted 06-04-2008 2:46 PM kjsimons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 3:53 AM 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 33 of 346 (469222)
06-04-2008 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Rahvin
06-04-2008 2:37 PM


Re: Rahvin
First off, thank you for the detailed reply. I am reading it with interest. A quick note:
For example, when we see a tooth, we can ascertain with reasonable certainty whether the owner of the tooth was carnivorous, herbivorous, or omnivorous; we can determine the rough size, and compare it to reptiles, mammals, etc and see which classification the tooth most closely resembles. A lot of information can be gained from nothing more than a tooth. More can be gained from "half a skeleton."
Have you ever seen a fruit bat?


QuickPost
Based on this skull, one would think that this animal is carniverous. Wanna take a guess what it eats?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Rahvin, posted 06-04-2008 2:37 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by molbiogirl, posted 06-04-2008 3:36 PM Dont Be a Flea has replied
 Message 35 by bluescat48, posted 06-04-2008 3:44 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 37 by Rahvin, posted 06-04-2008 4:28 PM Dont Be a Flea has not replied
 Message 51 by Nuggin, posted 06-05-2008 4:02 AM 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 39 of 346 (469297)
06-04-2008 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by molbiogirl
06-04-2008 3:36 PM


Hello molbiogirl
What is the area of your expertise? (besides having pretty cool hair) I’m just curious. You statement brimmed with confidence that this type of thing is up your alley.
I am opposed, I am arguing, but Im always searching.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by molbiogirl, posted 06-04-2008 3:36 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by molbiogirl, posted 06-04-2008 11:49 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 40 of 346 (469298)
06-04-2008 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Jaderis
06-04-2008 7:12 PM


Re: Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis.
I checked with my wife and we were there in November of 06. I can't believe that time can get away from me that fast. I did not intentionally lie about when I was there, I simply lost track of when I was there. It seemed like yesterday! I must be getting old. Please accept my humble time correction of two years instead of one. The banner I saw was not that one. It said "Archaeoraptor" on it. I remember commenting to my wife when we saw it that it was a fraud. She remembers it as well.
Edited by Dont Be a Flea, : Mispelled wurds suck
Edited by Dont Be a Flea, : sigh...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Jaderis, posted 06-04-2008 7:12 PM Jaderis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Jaderis, posted 06-05-2008 12:24 AM 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