Ever see the impressionable image they made for Nebraska Pig for textbook and media presentations? Did you ever see a more human looking pig in your life?
Well Java man was another mythological assumption-based missing link. Admittedly, YEC creationist sites draw all sorts of erroneous conclusions even claiming an alleged “deathbed” confession. Don’t they realize that this brings shame to the name? Just walk in the truth whatever it is. Know the truth and the TRUTH shall set you free. On the other hand, Evolutionary Biology propaganda sites are equally dishonest and draw all sorts of erroneous associations with other creatures found elsewhere that are anthropologically very distinct (forensically speaking). So the first truth we must consider is that even Dubois believed that “Pithecanthropus [Java Man] was not a man, but a gigantic genus allied to the gibbons.”
The skull cap and molars were clearly from some variety of early ape but the final Dubois construction was a bit contrived. Here is why!
The skull cap and molars (totally ape) were found on one occasion, and then later, about 50 feet away (still in level D however), they found the femur (equal to any human though slightly thicker) and instead of seeing it as possible evidence of early HUMANS existing at the same time as this other creature (which would be against the conclusion that would get funded) they fit the two unrelated finds into the theory (typical of bad science), and so erroneously insisted they belonged to the same creature and presented it as proof of an ape-like creature that was upright and bi-pedal like a human (remember poor Ota Benga).
This find was eventually associated with the Peking Man find (where to perpetuate the theory they again mixed evidence of early humans with evidence of apes) which was re-interpreted to force fit the data into the pedagogues “acceptable” theory. You aren’t supposed to know this part, but did you know Dubois also had two human skulls known as the Wadjak skulls found at the same site? Dubois never hid the fact but he never really brought them to light either. Some YECs claim he kept them hidden and some EBs have recently re-interpreted these to be Erectus skulls (he actually tried to claim they were Neanderthals but many others said Human) but they had to re-interpret them because the mythos aspect would have been exposed.
All evidence of humans existing prior to 195,000 bce MUST BE re-interpreted as something other or else re-combined with other things found near it (or sometimes from across the world) to make it appear non-human and partly ape.
Actually, when Ralph von Koenigswald (a German Paleontologist) found what turned out to be several early human fossils at the site of Peking Ape he found himself having a hard time receiving funding for his dig and was only able to continue there a short time after. However, he was funded for later digs elsewhere. In fact he made several other important discoveries in Java including those items found in Sangiran where he found a definitely human skull cap from the same time period as Dubois’ Java man. But you will not study this in public school or in most Universities because this information has been intentionally selectively excluded (“selective exclusion” is a technique of engineering opinion in thought control).
The Mojokerto child skull cap (found by von Koenigswald later still) was also clearly human (he named it Pithecanthropus modjokertensis), but Dubois (the pedagoguery’s current hero) protested that Pithecanthropus was not a human but an "ape-man" (do you see how the theory was used to interpret the data? Come on now….you know that is bad science)….see Theunissen, Bert (Jan 1, 1989),Eugène Dubois and the Ape-Man from Java: The History of the First `Missing Link' and Its Discoverer, (Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 161–162).
Many other early human fossils were discovered (see “Sangiran Early Man Site”…sorry I forget the details…but it was displayed by UNESCO) but the information has been repressed unless you dig for it, and the results contrary to the mantra are always “selectively excluded” from most pro-EB peer Journals (again, discarding contrary evidence is indoctrination not science).
Among the skulls there we have ape skulls and human skulls. are As a result of the facts of the “Sangiran Early Man Site” display as well as the work of other scientists, Time Magazine in the Nov. 30, 1953 issue (p. 83) footnoted that "Other early humans are heavily documented by multiple finds of their bones.” But you never hear that opinion (also so solidly based on scientific fact) presented along with the propaganda in your so-called education, did you? Why? Because it explodes the myth that no humans existed that far back, which is an assumption one must swallow whole to be able to re-interpret everything to make Darwin’s theory seem legit! It’s the Geobbels principle (originally noted by William James) which states if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it the masses will believe it is true.
But to complete the sale of the theory (avoiding the contrary data), and to imprint the innocently inquiring minds of generations (an important part of any successful propaganda plan) they had to have some artist make up an image that would be associated with the imposed dogma so they came up with another totally imaginary contrived ape and man mix (the children of course believed it and still do….I certainly did) which looks exactly like every fictional caveman I ever saw in a school book…
Many of my notes written down years ago were taken from mainly two sources one was G. H. R. von Koenigswald's, "Evolution of Man." University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor Paperback Series, Revised edition, 1976, translated by Arnold J. Pomerans and Swisher, Curtis, and Lewin's, Java Man: How Two Geologists Changed Our Understanding of Human Evolution, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
There are many examples of bones and other evidence found by many to be quite human were mixed with other near by ape-kind bones calling them something or other...but these could just as easily and just as appropriately been interpreted as two creatures (but to admit human would have questioned the dogma and caused an earlier dating for humans....the Darwinian pedagoguery really could not have that).
In some of the Java sites we found indications of burial processes and cooking (which means they knew how to use fire). In my opinion, if we just let the data speak, humans can be shown as early as 350 to 500,000 bce.
The truth is that if we just had let all the data rule the theory there would be no need to make up so many hodge podges and aid them with artistically contrived images. As pointed out in another thread the evidence is just as strong for early humans at the Olduvia gorge (but it did no fit the preconceived conclusion) as well.
Paul
Well Java man was another mythological assumption-based missing link. Admittedly, YEC creationist sites draw all sorts of erroneous conclusions even claiming an alleged “deathbed” confession. Don’t they realize that this brings shame to the name? Just walk in the truth whatever it is. Know the truth and the TRUTH shall set you free. On the other hand, Evolutionary Biology propaganda sites are equally dishonest and draw all sorts of erroneous associations with other creatures found elsewhere that are anthropologically very distinct (forensically speaking). So the first truth we must consider is that even Dubois believed that “Pithecanthropus [Java Man] was not a man, but a gigantic genus allied to the gibbons.”
The skull cap and molars were clearly from some variety of early ape but the final Dubois construction was a bit contrived. Here is why!
The skull cap and molars (totally ape) were found on one occasion, and then later, about 50 feet away (still in level D however), they found the femur (equal to any human though slightly thicker) and instead of seeing it as possible evidence of early HUMANS existing at the same time as this other creature (which would be against the conclusion that would get funded) they fit the two unrelated finds into the theory (typical of bad science), and so erroneously insisted they belonged to the same creature and presented it as proof of an ape-like creature that was upright and bi-pedal like a human (remember poor Ota Benga).
This find was eventually associated with the Peking Man find (where to perpetuate the theory they again mixed evidence of early humans with evidence of apes) which was re-interpreted to force fit the data into the pedagogues “acceptable” theory. You aren’t supposed to know this part, but did you know Dubois also had two human skulls known as the Wadjak skulls found at the same site? Dubois never hid the fact but he never really brought them to light either. Some YECs claim he kept them hidden and some EBs have recently re-interpreted these to be Erectus skulls (he actually tried to claim they were Neanderthals but many others said Human) but they had to re-interpret them because the mythos aspect would have been exposed.
All evidence of humans existing prior to 195,000 bce MUST BE re-interpreted as something other or else re-combined with other things found near it (or sometimes from across the world) to make it appear non-human and partly ape.
Actually, when Ralph von Koenigswald (a German Paleontologist) found what turned out to be several early human fossils at the site of Peking Ape he found himself having a hard time receiving funding for his dig and was only able to continue there a short time after. However, he was funded for later digs elsewhere. In fact he made several other important discoveries in Java including those items found in Sangiran where he found a definitely human skull cap from the same time period as Dubois’ Java man. But you will not study this in public school or in most Universities because this information has been intentionally selectively excluded (“selective exclusion” is a technique of engineering opinion in thought control).
The Mojokerto child skull cap (found by von Koenigswald later still) was also clearly human (he named it Pithecanthropus modjokertensis), but Dubois (the pedagoguery’s current hero) protested that Pithecanthropus was not a human but an "ape-man" (do you see how the theory was used to interpret the data? Come on now….you know that is bad science)….see Theunissen, Bert (Jan 1, 1989),Eugène Dubois and the Ape-Man from Java: The History of the First `Missing Link' and Its Discoverer, (Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 161–162).
Many other early human fossils were discovered (see “Sangiran Early Man Site”…sorry I forget the details…but it was displayed by UNESCO) but the information has been repressed unless you dig for it, and the results contrary to the mantra are always “selectively excluded” from most pro-EB peer Journals (again, discarding contrary evidence is indoctrination not science).
Among the skulls there we have ape skulls and human skulls. are As a result of the facts of the “Sangiran Early Man Site” display as well as the work of other scientists, Time Magazine in the Nov. 30, 1953 issue (p. 83) footnoted that "Other early humans are heavily documented by multiple finds of their bones.” But you never hear that opinion (also so solidly based on scientific fact) presented along with the propaganda in your so-called education, did you? Why? Because it explodes the myth that no humans existed that far back, which is an assumption one must swallow whole to be able to re-interpret everything to make Darwin’s theory seem legit! It’s the Geobbels principle (originally noted by William James) which states if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it the masses will believe it is true.
But to complete the sale of the theory (avoiding the contrary data), and to imprint the innocently inquiring minds of generations (an important part of any successful propaganda plan) they had to have some artist make up an image that would be associated with the imposed dogma so they came up with another totally imaginary contrived ape and man mix (the children of course believed it and still do….I certainly did) which looks exactly like every fictional caveman I ever saw in a school book…
Many of my notes written down years ago were taken from mainly two sources one was G. H. R. von Koenigswald's, "Evolution of Man." University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor Paperback Series, Revised edition, 1976, translated by Arnold J. Pomerans and Swisher, Curtis, and Lewin's, Java Man: How Two Geologists Changed Our Understanding of Human Evolution, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
There are many examples of bones and other evidence found by many to be quite human were mixed with other near by ape-kind bones calling them something or other...but these could just as easily and just as appropriately been interpreted as two creatures (but to admit human would have questioned the dogma and caused an earlier dating for humans....the Darwinian pedagoguery really could not have that).
In some of the Java sites we found indications of burial processes and cooking (which means they knew how to use fire). In my opinion, if we just let the data speak, humans can be shown as early as 350 to 500,000 bce.
The truth is that if we just had let all the data rule the theory there would be no need to make up so many hodge podges and aid them with artistically contrived images. As pointed out in another thread the evidence is just as strong for early humans at the Olduvia gorge (but it did no fit the preconceived conclusion) as well.
Paul
![[serious]](/data/avatars/m/160/160873.jpg?1431539545){kind=avatar}
