Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolutionist Frauds
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 52 (86945)
02-17-2004 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by NosyNed
02-16-2004 6:31 PM


Haeckel
Haeckel's embryo drawings is the only other one I know of.
[This message has been edited by Tamara, 02-17-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by NosyNed, posted 02-16-2004 6:31 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 10:18 AM Tamara has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 52 (86983)
02-17-2004 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by NosyNed
02-17-2004 11:21 AM


Re: Haeckel
I recommend the article Steven Jay Gould wrote on the Haeckel mess.
If Haeckel claimed that he was entitled to "simplify" his drawings in such a crude and misleading way does not make his claim sound.
http://www.findarticles.com/...109/60026710/p1/article.jhtml
----
There are also other frauds like the bird/dino fossil found in China recently that was quickly discovered to be a fake. Because a scientist happened to purchase the other side of the fossil plate and found the picture rather different. But this is more of a fraud perpetrated ON evolutionists. It just raises the question of... how many other frauds are there undetected? This particular detection was only due to a very fortuitous event.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 02-17-2004 11:21 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Tamara, posted 02-17-2004 11:57 AM Tamara has not replied
 Message 14 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 12:10 PM Tamara has replied
 Message 16 by PaulK, posted 02-17-2004 12:22 PM Tamara has not replied
 Message 17 by NosyNed, posted 02-17-2004 1:25 PM Tamara has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 52 (86984)
02-17-2004 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Tamara
02-17-2004 11:51 AM


Re: Haeckel
Oh and another point. Even if the Haeckel drawings were just very bad drawings, purporting to show how ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny, then how come they have been foisted on students for nearly 100 years after being recognized so???!!! That in itself is pretty fraudulent in my book.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Tamara, posted 02-17-2004 11:51 AM Tamara has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 52 (87011)
02-17-2004 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by MrHambre
02-17-2004 12:10 PM


Re: Haeckel
quote:
We're so glad you agree with Stephen Jay Gould that the Haeckel drawings are misleading.
Nice to have some agreement, MrH! (Is that a royal "we" or have you perchance cloned yourself -- perish the thought!)
quote:
We're not surprised that you don't agree with Gould that evolution doesn't require such subterfuge.
I see you are once again engaged in trying to read my mind, and doing poorly at it. I suggest you engage your mind instead.
I have no problems with embryology as such, and disagree with Wells regarding photos or accurate drawings of embryos.
quote:
It seems you've made up your mind that all evidence for evolution is deceitful,
(cough, cough) I see you are once again engaged in trying to read my mind, and doing poorly at it. I suggest you engage your mind instead.
quote:
and that all fossils are frauds.
Unless you quit attributing to me stuff I never said, you might soon find YOURSELF of being relagated to frauddom, sir!
quote:
Forgive us if our views are a bit more informed and rational.
Ack! Don't you worry that if you puff up any more you'll burst?

-----
Moose, I saw that thread. I know a number of textbook authors are finally making corrections. Took 100 years, but what the heck. Better late than never, eh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 12:10 PM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 1:52 PM Tamara has replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 52 (87029)
02-17-2004 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by MrHambre
02-17-2004 1:52 PM


Re: Haeckel
quote:
Everyone here is well aware that the Haeckel drawings are still used to prove a point that Darwinists abandoned nearly a century ago. We have agreed that they were certainly misleading, perhaps even fraudulent.
Well then, nuff said, no? This thread was opened up to list the frauds. It has not been opened up to discuss what I believe, so I must demur for another time, tempting tho it may be to have such a showcase!
As for me "accusing everyone here of paranoia" -- where in the world DO you get your information, MrH?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 1:52 PM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by NosyNed, posted 02-17-2004 2:18 PM Tamara has not replied
 Message 22 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 2:40 PM Tamara has replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 52 (87061)
02-17-2004 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by MrHambre
02-17-2004 2:40 PM


Re: Haeckel
quote:
So far the rap sheet seems a bit short after working on it for over a century
True, NosyNed. That is the nice thing about science. Fraud is usually outed in the end.
MrH: Back to the land of ad hominems? Have a nice journey. But please note that the next time you accuse me of dishonesty, I will call you on it. Consider yourself warned.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 2:40 PM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by MrHambre, posted 02-17-2004 3:35 PM Tamara has not replied
 Message 25 by NosyNed, posted 02-17-2004 3:47 PM Tamara has replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 52 (87070)
02-17-2004 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by NosyNed
02-17-2004 3:47 PM


Re: Haeckel
Nah... everybody deserves one warning... why waste time with bluffers?
quote:
It seems to be better than that. Because fraud seems to be outed sooner rather than later there is a significant deterrant to committing fraud (or even too much carelessness) in the first place.
Exactly. That is what I meant. And I agree with you, there are too many areas in the society at large where the incentive to cheat seems to be built in. And then people wonder when the scandals are uncovered... It's a no brainer.
MrH: Can you provide a cogent and coherent argument as to why I should continue talking with you after you impugn my integrity?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by NosyNed, posted 02-17-2004 3:47 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 52 (87459)
02-19-2004 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Sylas
02-18-2004 3:11 AM


Re: Archaeoraptor
Gasp, Sylas, here I been on a roll as the enemy of all reason and you rush in to ruin my reputation! Nooooo!
Hey, thanks. I guess sanity still exists in the crazy ol' world of ours! Will be looking forward to more of your posts. The details of the story are very interesting.
The F is for fake article says that concern about fakes is real. Here are a few sentences from it:
Many early palaeontologists saw nothing wrong with adding a missing bone or two. Both the American Museum of Natural History and the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh acquired fossil skeletons of Apatosaurus with skulls from different dinosaurs in the 1880s. But the prices that well-preserved Chinese bird fossils fetch have made faking extremely profitable. Over the past twenty years, says Derstler, "adhesives and fake rock have become very easy to make and very difficult to spot."
"The whole commercial market for fossils has gotten riddled with fakery," complains Martin.
[This message has been edited by Tamara, 02-19-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Sylas, posted 02-18-2004 3:11 AM Sylas has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by NosyNed, posted 02-19-2004 10:13 AM Tamara has not replied
 Message 35 by Sylas, posted 02-19-2004 12:01 PM Tamara has replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 52 (87486)
02-19-2004 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Sylas
02-19-2004 12:01 PM


classification
I recently saw a diagram claiming that the holy 5 of my remembered classification were redone: instead of fish, amphibian, liz, bird, and mammal we now have only 4 with the birds put in with the lizards. Hmm... Does that make sense? I don't want to seem an old fogey holding on to tradition for tradition's sake but somehow this just does not feel right...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Sylas, posted 02-19-2004 12:01 PM Sylas has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 02-19-2004 1:50 PM Tamara has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 52 (87684)
02-20-2004 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by wj
02-20-2004 2:59 AM


Re: others
What color is the sky in your world, wj?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by wj, posted 02-20-2004 2:59 AM wj has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 52 (87685)
02-20-2004 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by wj
02-20-2004 2:59 AM


Re: others
From post 29:
"I contacted farmers and asked if they'd seen anything with the body of a bird and a tail of a dinosaur. A lot of them have got private stores of fossils and I thought maybe we'll be lucky and somebody will have something similar."
He did get lucky. A local farmer who was involved also in fossil collecting did have something similar... similar right down to small cracks and marks on the rock.
----
Hello? Fortuitous event calling out to Brisbane! Hello? Earth to Doris?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by wj, posted 02-20-2004 2:59 AM wj has not replied

  
Tamara
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 52 (88859)
02-26-2004 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Sylas
02-20-2004 10:00 AM


what happened?
You know, Sylas, I've been thinking... maybe this person's strategy is just to attack regardless of what is said? I've run into that before online... basically a way to waste the opponent's time with endless unsupported counterclaims or accusations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Sylas, posted 02-20-2004 10:00 AM Sylas has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by JonF, posted 02-28-2004 9:36 AM Tamara 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