“The problem is, at some point the fossil was known by “Geographic” to be a fake, and that information was not revealed,” Storrs L. Olson, Curator of Birds, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.
Pin It
Category: Creation
Must evolutionary science, from time to time, simply fake evidence, commit fraud, perpetrate hoaxes — lie? Why is that? Why stage so-called evidence when none exists? Why fill in the blanks of all of the unknowns with pure speculation? Why lie? Why perpetrate fraud? Why commit hoaxes?
Pin It
“Skull fragment may not be human”, announced the Knoxville News-Sentinel. The Daily Telegraph, an Australian newspaper, carried the story of the latest bone hoax with the much more humorous (pardon the pun) headline: “ASS TAKEN FOR MAN.”
Pin It
It is a fact that Darwinists eagerly desire evidence that man descended from an apelike ancestor, so much so that they often manufacture the evidence. The fact is that more than a century and a half of searching has not revealed this to be the case, even though millions of fossils have been dug out of the ground and examined by some of the brightest minds on planet earth.
Logic dictates that if Peking Man were an intermediate sub-human species, one of man’s evolutionary ancestors, that lived for even a few hundred generations, there should be abundant fossil remains available today.
Pin It
Finally, in 1953 and after nearly 40 years, Joseph Weiner and Kenneth Oakley applied the recently developed fluorine test to the bones—and found that Piltdown Man was a complete hoax. Someone had intentionally taken an ape jaw and combined it with a fragment of human skull bone, filed the teeth somewhat, and then carefully stained the entire “specimen” so that the bones looked both ancient and appeared to be a matching set.
Pin It
A recent comment made it clear to me that I had not covered my reasons for calling Darwinism a religion in enough detail. I will recap those reasons here, for the record, and then continue the series of “Pious Frauds” committed by the Darwinian faithful.
Pin It
Citing Neanderthal as a transitional form between ape and man? The fact is that so called “Neanderthals” were 100% human beings, as human as you or I, who happened to have various perfectly explainable health conditions. Painting them as half-man/half-apes, or a “separately evolved” race of hominids is simply unsubstantiated, misleading, and fraudulent.
Pin It
Far from being indisputable, both the validity and the relevance of Java Man remains in serious and continuous dispute and, like Nebraska man, shares a heritage rich in fraud.
Pin It
If Darwinists were so obviously right, why all the Pious Fraud? Why ANY fraud at all? Why not let facts lead to unavoidable conclusions? Why add lies, misdirection, obfuscation, mendacity, fraud, and fabrication to the argument? Why is that necessary? What is the meaning of that? What do you suppose the intent, is?
Pin It