• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Evolutionist Caught Lying for Their Religion- Fossils

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
*staff edit*


The Fossil Record


“Evolutionist see what they want to see, they see a past they believe has happened, and that desire drives their vision.”
-Randy Guliazza P.E M.D the imaginary Piltdown man


Artistic License

“Unfortunately, the vast majority of artist's conceptions are based more on imagination than on evidence. But a handful of expert natural-history artists begin with the fossil bones of a hominid and work from there…. Much of the reconstruction, however, is guesswork. Bones say nothing about the fleshy parts of the nose, lips, or ears. Artists must create something between an ape and a human being; the older the specimen is said to be, the more apelike they make it.... Hairiness is a matter of pure conjecture.”
-Bert Thompson, P.H.D. and Brad Harrub, P.H.D., 15 Answers to John Rennie and Scientific AmericanHYPERLINK "http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/dc-02-safull.pdf"'HYPERLINK "http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/dc-02-safull.pdf"s Nonsense


“There is a popular image of human evolution that you’ll find all over the place, from the backs of cereal packets to advertisements for expensive scientific equipment. On the left of the picture there’s an ape—stocky, jutting jaw, hunched in the knuckle-walking position. On the right, a man—graceful, high forehead, striding purposefully into the future. Between the two is a succession of figures that become ever more like humans, as the shoulders start to pull back, the torso slims down, the arms retract, the legs extend, the cranium expands and the chin recedes. Our progress from ape to human looks so smooth, so tidy. It’s such a beguiling image that even the experts are loath to let it go. But it is an illusion.”
-Wood, B., Who are we? New Scientist 176(2366):44–47, 26 October 2002


Why is it evolutionist think that dead organisms can do something “long ago” and “far away” that the same organisms cannot do today? Which is reproduce something other than its kind. In part because most of what is presented as missing links is just artistic license. Artists are told to draw the creature from the perspective of evolution and how old the fossils are said to be, thus how far along in the evolutionary process they are. Most fossils are really only fragments of the original animal a piece of jaw or tooth and can be interpreted various ways and disagreements over even what species they are occur. Than they draw pictures of what they believe it may have looked like in this evolutionary process to try to convince you of evolution, Allot of imagination and interpretation go into these finds and drawings. Here is the missing link “European man”

news.2008.691.jpg


“Imaginative action stories, art, and computer animations must be employed to “sell” evolution to the public.”
-John Morris and Frank Sherwin the fossil Record 2017


Lucy is a well known claimed missing link [more on lucy later]. She is also a very complete fossil 40%compared to most usally 10% or less. Yet even with Lucy there are many forms and ways she has been presented by evolutionist.

lucy-depictions.jpg

lucy-makeover.jpg

ape-or-ape-man.jpg


The above shows the actual fossils found . With enough interpretation you can make fossils appear as you wish them to. In the book The greatest hoax on earth by Jonathan Safarti he talked of any interview with a fossil artists. Who says they draw a picture of what they are told to make the fossil look like, than the drawings are sent back to make more ape like, more human, or whatever is desired, until the picture matches what the evolutionist wanted. So when ever you see a picture in a textbook as proof of a missing link, ignore it and first see the actual fossils to see if the evidence matches the story told about them, what they want you to believe the fossils say.

fossils are fickle, bones will sing any song you want to hear”
-Shreeve j arguments over a woman discover 11[8] 58 1990


“In science, “seeing is believing” but in evolution, “believing is seeing.” It takes a lot of believing to see an evolutionary thread through the scattered, shattered fossil fragments that serve as a basis for so many different “just so” stories and illustrative paintings.”
-John Morris and Frank Sherwin the Fossil Record 2017


In fact they dont even need fossils

“I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.”
-Charles Darwin



Nebraska man

Nebraska-Man.jpg


Nebraska man was used to support evolution as a missing link It was presented in the museums and textbooks, shown in pictures in newspapers, as a missing link. They had enough fossil evidence that they could tell what environment Nebraska man lived in, what his wife and kids looked like, and what they ate. It was examined by leading authorities from 26 institutions across Europe and the US and classified as a missing link. The fossils remains were estimated to be around 10 million years old. Later it was found out the only actual evidence found was 1 tooth.

i-c2e1abd20f625e59fe00a560380e4237-hespero-molar-type.jpg


As Creationist Duane Gish said, science is truly an amazing thing when they get that much information from one tooth. Not only that, it was a tooth of a pig. Here is the real Nebraska man

180427-pig-brains-outside-body-feature.jpg


This shows how much imagination goes along with these finds and that they see what they want to see. How many believed in evolution because of this “missing link” over the decades.


Piltdown man

FossilManofSussexCrop600-264x300.jpg



“Darwin's theory is proved true”
-NY Times sep 22 1912


“How is it that trained men, the greatest experts of their day, could look at a set of modern human bones—the cranial fragments—and “see” a clear simian signature in them; and “see” in an ape’s jaw the unmistakable signs of humanity? The answers, inevitably, have to do with the scientists’ expectations and their effects on the interpretation of data.
-Lewin, Bones of Contention, p. 61.


Piltdown man was in the textbooks and museums as proof of evolution for over 40 years it was seen as the fossil evidence for evolution. Hundreds of peer reviewed research papers were written on the fossil and information was factually given about how they died, their language and parenting. Tax money was used to build a monument and national sanctuary at the site of the find for this “most important evidence for evolution.” Claimed to be between 100,000 and 500,000 years old as newspapers around the world sold it to the public as proof of evolution.

“Researchers shaped reality to their hearts desire.”
-Blinderman The Piltdown Inquest

“Many scientist were so elated by the discovery that they uncritically accepted the sloppy forgery”
-Jerry Bergman Evolution's Blunders, Frauds, and forgeries


Later it was found to be a human skull with an apes jaw chiseled down to fit and stained to look old actually only a few hundred years old. Many scientist were involved with the forgeries including sir Arthur Smith Woodward director of the natural history museum in London who was given many awards and honors for the find. The job was even done horribly, scratch marks were left teeth artificially ground down in one case the pulp cavity was worn down and had to be filled with sand. The teeth were angular instead or rounded, flattened at different angels and standard store bought paint was used on the canine tooth.

“How easily susceptible researchers can be manipulated into believing that they have actually found just what they had been looking for.”
-biology philosopher Jane Maienschein Maienschein, J. 1997. The One and the Many: Epistemological Reflections on the Modern Human Origins Debates. Conceptual Issues in Modern Human Origins Research. Clark, G. A. and C. M. Willermet, eds. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 413.

*staff edit*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Heissonear

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Having trouble with images. To see with the important images view this thread.
https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=82719


Pithecanthropus Erectus Java Man


View attachment 239641
View attachment 239642
portrayal vs actual fossils


Java man was the primary evidence used in the scopes trial as proof of evolution. It was used as an example for decades as proof of evolution and a missing link..Less than 1% of the complete human skeleton was found.

Tantalizingly incomplete, and for most scientist it was inadequate as confirmation of Darwin's view of human evolution.”
-Boule M and Vallois H.V Fossil men a textbook of human paleontology


The founder of the fossil Eugene Dubois went looking for missing links packing up his family to travel in search to prove evolution. Dubois thought that finding missing link “would be the greatest scientific discovery ever.”

“Dubois had a powerful motivation to find this missing link- to disprove theism because he know believed “There is no truth in religion” and he was drawn to prove evolution with an almost religious fervor”
-Milner the encyclopedia of Evolution and Jerry Bergman Evolution's Blunders, Frauds, and forgeries


The fossils were not found together as one unit but were scattered about. The fossils were not found by Dubois but by an untrained convict labors.

“The finds were made under circumstances that would later haunt the entire endeavor and threatened to ruin Dubois reputation.”
-Regal Human Evolution


After his original claims of finding a missing link [he had no training as a paleontologist] when he returned he hid the bones for 25 years after criticism from the scientific community arose, he was

Willingly blind to opposing evidence”
-Steven J Gould Men of the thirty-third division


Dubois later changed his mind and said his fossil was of a Gibbon [see E Dubois on the fossil human skulls recently discovered in java]. One of the molars was actually found 25 miles away and likely not part of java man. The Femur and Molar [other] are that of a humans.

“Weather or not these bones belong to the same individuals, if they do not, we have remains of two or three individuals.”
-J Mccabe the story of evolution


The Skull cap has been argued and debated but appears to be that of a human variant like neanderthals. Harvard paleontologist Dan lieberman studied a more complete skull of a java man and said

“It is the first H Erectus find with a reasonable complete cranial base and it looks modern.”
-Java skull offers new view of homo erectus Science 299 [5611] 1293 2003


The fossils were originally dated by Dubois at 7-10 million years to fit the missing link time line. Today they are said to be 250,000-500,000 years old. And they are

Considered an early human species, not a missing link between ape and man...Dubois spent most of his life trying to press a wrong conclusion.”
-Milner the encyclopedia of evolution

“The homo erectus type appears to be one of the many variants of humans that have existed in history and still exists today.”
-Tattersall I Devson E and Couvering encyclopedia on human evolution and pre history




Pithecanthropus Alaus


View attachment 239637

Ernst Haekel the “great German apostle of Darwinism” believed in a mythical land known as Lemaria where apes evolved into man as there were no fossils transitions on our continents, thus there must have been a land where they did evolve on. This land of course was know sunken [like Atlantis] into the sea. A 1962 biology textbook described the half man half monkey fossils as “Short, squat creatures.”

“Who could doubt the exsistance of that contented looking burger family?
-Richards R.J Ernst haeckel the tragic sense of Life


This all of course shows the power of photos on a uneducated public that allows evolutionist to indoctrinate as the creatures never existed.

“Pictures are easily grasped and, to the uninformed, can be very convincing evidence of evolution”
-Jerry Bergman Evolution's Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries



Archaeoraptor


View attachment 239638 View attachment 239639 View attachment 239640

National geographic the biggest promoter of evolution worldwide promoted Archaeoraptor as a missing link to prove the dinosaur to bird connection they push. However it was a fraudulent fossil that combined the body of a birdlike creature with a tail from a different dinosaur. After much pressure the magazine gave a small retraction in a later edition.

“Red-faced and downhearted, paleontologists are growing convinced that they have been snookered by a bit of fossil fakery from China. The “feathered dinosaur” specimen that they recently unveiled to much fanfare apparently combines the tail of a dinosaur with the body of a bird, they say. “It’s the craziest thing I’ve ever been involved with in my career,”
-Philip J. Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology in Drumheller, Alberta Monastersky, R. 2000. All mixed up over birds and dinosaurs. Science News. 157 (3): 38.


Another fraud in the bird to dinosaur link is the fossil Confuciusornis. In fact frauds are common.

“Archeroptor is just the tip of the iceberg, there are scores of fake fossils out there, and they have cast a dark shadow over the whole field.”
-Discover magazine A Feducia


Frauds are common in museums and specifically China where it has been estimated that 80% of marine reptile fossils are fake.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
These are just a few of the lies on the fossil record. Another thread will deal with the fossil record as a whole. Some great sources on more of the common lies they use are below.

Great Sources Exposing the most Common Lies in Textbooks


Lies in textbooks
Video 4 of Kent Hovind seminar lies in the textbooks.

http://www.creationtoday.org/lies-in-the-textbooks-seminar-part-4/

How Textbooks Mislead Dr Don Batten

http://usstore.creation.com/catalog/textbooks-mislead-p-1105.html

What the schools are teaching Dr Charles Jackson

http://usstore.creation.com/catalog/what-schools-teaching-supercamp-p-1129.html?osCsid=mbeej69pjaamce1d75sa0o5oa0

Evolution's Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries Paperback – December 1, 2017
by Jerry Bergman

https://www.amazon.com/Evolutions-Blunders-Frauds-Forgeries-Bergman/dp/1942773595

Zombie Science: More Icons of Evolution March 27, 2017 by
Jonathan Wells

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1936599449/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1


Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong Paperback – January, 2002by Jonathan Wells

https://www.amazon.com/Icons-Evolut...rd_wg=eBGUf&psc=1&refRID=TYVAFK4GVXZCTD3EXVRB

Evolutionist Caught Lying for Their Religion and has Evolution Been Demonstrated
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-and-has-evolution-been-demonstrated.8075785/


Debates

Kent Hovind debates 20 free online
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6-cVj-ZRivpHQhRLUXmLV3nxZ_kWtND-


The Genesis Debate

"The Genesis Debate: Skeptic vs Creationist" is a debate between Dr. Paul Willis and Dr. Carl Wieland over the topic of Creation (more specifically, "Does scientific evidence support a literal Genesis?"). Dr. Paul Willis was the former winner of Australia's "Skeptic of the Year" award, and Dr. Carl Wieland is Managing Director of Creation Ministries International (Australia).

free online


Oregon state university debate

kevin Anderson obtained his Ph.D. from Kansas State University in Microbiology. He held an NIH postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Illinois and was Professor of Microbiology at Mississippi State University, where he taught graduate level courses in molecular genetics. He later served as a research microbiologist for the U. S. Department of Agriculture before accepting his current position as Director of the Van Andel Creation Research Center in Chino Valley, Arizona. He is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the Creation Research Society Quarterly.

Vs

Andy Karplus is Professor and Chair of the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at OSU, where he has taught since 1998. He holds a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Washington and was twice an Alexander von Humboldt Fellow at the University of Freiburg in Germany. He has received several awards for his research and has authored or co-authored over 100 peer-reviewed articles on protein structure-function relationships
free online
http://oregonstate.edu/groups/socratic/content/is-evolution-compatible-christian-belief



Creation vs Evolution Dr Mark Farmer (evolution) and Dr Carl Wieland (creation)
https://www.amazon.com/Clash-Over-Origins-Creation-Evolution/dp/0949906638

Dr Ian Plimer vs Dr Duane Gish - 1988 Sydney, Australia Debate free online
16 part debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT7nGNguZg8HYPERLINK "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT7nGNguZg8&feature=related"&HYPERLINK "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT7nGNguZg8&feature=related"feature=related


Skeptics vs Creationist a formal debate Read free online

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/skeptics_vs_creationists.pdf

The Great Dothan Creation/Evolution Debate Dr Robert Carter vs Rick Pierson
https://usstore.creation.com/the-great-dothan-creation-evolution-debate

Two Christians debate the age of the earth

Dr. Hugh Ross and Dr. Danny Faulkner
https://www.amazon.com/Debate-Over-Age-Earth-Demonstrate/dp/B0052O5RYS

Watch The Creationism Vs. Evolution Debate: Ken Ham And Bill Nye [ a rare time the evolutionist win because Answers in genesis is too worldview directed]
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...nism-vs-evolution-debate-bill-nye-and-ken-ham





 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟166,950.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Answers in Genesis is a well known pseudoscience website. Their information is usually inaccurate and/or Incomplete as they deliberately ignore anything that disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible . Other creationist websites and organizations have the same problem .
91A4C852-58EF-42E7-AB9E-47420888F911.jpeg

This is H Heidelbergensis and obviously there is enough of the skull to do a forensic reconstruction of the face. We do find enough facial bones and skulls so we do know what they look like. In Lucy’s case , the missing information is that we have more than one Australopithecus afarensis female and we do have duplicates of most bones even if Lucy’s bones are missing!

CB617D3B-807C-473D-A36C-57EF80054418.png

This is a reconstruction of Crassigyrinus
which is a fishopod - an fish/amphibian. It’s done in an artistic manner but it’s accurate. Creationists also claim falsely , that these intermediate organisms don’t exist.
Unlike the incompetents at these creationist organizations, mainstream scientists would get fired for type of fabrication that creationists routinely do
 
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Answers in Genesis is a well known pseudoscience website. Their information is usually inaccurate and/or Incomplete as they deliberately ignore anything that disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible . Other creationist websites and organizations have the same problem . View attachment 239663
This is H Heidelbergensis and obviously there is enough of the skull to do a forensic reconstruction of the face. We do find enough facial bones and skulls so we do know what they look like. In Lucy’s case , the missing information is that we have more than one Australopithecus afarensis female and we do have duplicates of most bones even if Lucy’s bones are missing!

View attachment 239664
This is a reconstruction of Crassigyrinus
which is a fishopod - an fish/amphibian. It’s done in an artistic manner but it’s accurate. Creationists also claim falsely , that these intermediate organisms don’t exist.
Unlike the incompetents at these creationist organizations, mainstream scientists would get fired for type of fabrication that creationists routinely do



Claiming and showing AIG is pseudoscience are two very different things. Besides what does that have to do with my op's subject of evolutionist lying to indoctrinate students? true pseudoscience.


As for H Heidelbergensis I am unsure what you are arguing here. Looks to me fully within the diversity of man.

And as for Crassigyrinus notice you say

Creationists also claim falsely , that these intermediate organisms don’t exist. Unlike the incompetents at these creationist organizations, mainstream scientists would get fired for type of fabrication that creationists routinely do."

So I can know see why you believe AIG is pusdo science. You think they deny the existence of creatures. Could you support this? show me where they deny that this creature is real. Of course you cannot. You make false assumptions of those you disagree with so you can more easily dismiss them, its human nature. But I like the claims that if mainstream scientist lied or made stuff up, they would be fired. Rather the truth is they get in the textbooks. As this thread and others show.


SO as for the actual creature it is not a missing link if that is your claim, it is fully developed. It is a creature with some fish some amphibian like features. Look at a platapus, some animals dont fit in our human classification systems well. This does not prove that creature came from a all fish or all amphibian ancestor. It came from a animal like itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Answers in Genesis is a well known pseudoscience website. Their information is usually inaccurate and/or Incomplete as they deliberately ignore anything that disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible . Other creationist websites and organizations have the same problem . View attachment 239663
This is H Heidelbergensis and obviously there is enough of the skull to do a forensic reconstruction of the face. We do find enough facial bones and skulls so we do know what they look like. In Lucy’s case , the missing information is that we have more than one Australopithecus afarensis female and we do have duplicates of most bones even if Lucy’s bones are missing!

View attachment 239664
This is a reconstruction of Crassigyrinus
which is a fishopod - an fish/amphibian. It’s done in an artistic manner but it’s accurate. Creationists also claim falsely , that these intermediate organisms don’t exist.
Unlike the incompetents at these creationist organizations, mainstream scientists would get fired for type of fabrication that creationists routinely do



Claiming and showing AIG is pseudoscience are two very different things. Besides what does that have to do with my op's subject of evolutionist lying to indoctrinate students? true pseudoscience.


As for H Heidelbergensis I am unsure what you are arguing here. Looks to me fully within the diversity of man.

And as for Crassigyrinus notice you say

Creationists also claim falsely , that these intermediate organisms don’t exist. Unlike the incompetents at these creationist organizations, mainstream scientists would get fired for type of fabrication that creationists routinely do."

So I can know see why you believe AIG is pusdo science. You think they deny the existence of creatures. Could you support this? show me where they deny that this creature is real. Of course you cannot. You make false assumptions of those you disagree with so you can more easily dismiss them, its human nature. But I like the claims that if mainstream scientist lied or made stuff up, they would be fired. Rather the truth is they get in the textbooks. As this thread and others show.


SO as for the actual creature it is not a missing link if that is your claim, it is fully developed. It is a creature with some fish some amphibian like features. Look at a platapus, some animals dont fit in our human classification systems well. This does not prove that creature came from a all fish or all amphibian ancestor. It came from a animal like itself.
 
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟166,950.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I do know that Dr Feduccia thinks that archaeopteryx is an archosaur . Archosaurs are the ancestors of dinosaurs. He simply thinks that birds are cousins of dinosaurs . The feathered dinosaurs in China were discovered after Dr Feduccia made these statements and there is also some very recent evidence that birds evolved more than once which is still being investigated.
Creationist organizations routinely leave out relevant information when it comes to biological or paleontological information about evolution. Mainstream scientists ignore creationists for the most part because of the routine distortions and outright lies. They simply have a bad track record.

Tolkien has been told this repeatedly ( with evidence ) but he still comes back and repeats the same nonsense
 
  • Agree
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Site Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟177,504.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Lol.

Was it a creationist that faked piltdown man?

Was it a creationist that faked Nebraska man?

Was it a creationist that drew flippers, flukes and blow holes where none existed?

No, it was creationists that objected and so were accused of lying, even if in the end it was the evolutionists that were found to be the liars......
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I do know that Dr Feduccia thinks that archaeopteryx is an archosaur . Archosaurs are the ancestors of dinosaurs. He simply thinks that birds are cousins of dinosaurs . The feathered dinosaurs in China were discovered after Dr Feduccia made these statements and there is also some very recent evidence that birds evolved more than once which is still being investigated.
Creationist organizations routinely leave out relevant information when it comes to biological or paleontological information about evolution. Mainstream scientists ignore creationists for the most part because of the routine distortions and outright lies. They simply have a bad track record.

Tolkien has been told this repeatedly ( with evidence ) but he still comes back and repeats the same nonsense

I am sorry I just cant believe you when you speak of creationist as you have shows they believe only what you imagine them to believe.

So I am not sure you are very familiar with my posts or creationist. I am guessing you are referring to Archaeopteryx. So if you think it is a missing link argue it. Respond to what I have said. Show us why it proves evolution. Instead of just more baseless claims support your posts.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,373
Frozen North
✟344,333.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Yay, another giant PRATT list, complete with quote mining! :clap:

Man, I missed this old-school creationist style of posting. Haven't seen Kent Hovind being referenced here in awhile (since the whole going-to-prison thing happened).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟166,950.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
platypus fits very well into our classification schemes . First off it is a mammal . It meets the broad criteria for being a mammal . It does show some ancestral traits that modern mammals don’t have. They lay leathery eggs like their Reptilomorpha ancestors and the males have poison glands on their hind legs .
 
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟166,950.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Lol, was it a creationist that faked piltdown man?

Was it a creationists that invented Nebraska Man from a piogs tooth????

Was it a creationist that drew a fluked tail, flippers and a blowhole on fossils where none existed?????

Was it a creationist that said archaeopteryx was the first transition to bird?

No, in each of these cases it was the creationist that simply objected to the outright lies of the evolutionist.... and so they were the ones blamed because they didn't agree with the scientists, who were the ones that ended up being wrong....
. “Piltdown man” was never formally described by scientists because the owner never allowed a close examination of it. Then you had newspapers popularize the skull. It was a deliberate fake.
“Nebraska man” was newspaper hype . Newspapers blew the discovery out of proportion and named the fossil . Pig teeth superficially do look like human teeth and with a cursory exam it is easy to make that mistake. The mistake was corrected soon after the discovery of the tooth but more than 50 years later , creationists still think this is relevant somehow.

What about archaeopteryx? It is a Dino bird . It has traits of both lineages . It’s not a fake , it’s not even unique as there are a lot of Dino bird and feathered dinosaurs coming out of China recently
 
Upvote 0

46AND2

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
Sep 5, 2012
5,807
2,210
Vancouver, WA
✟109,603.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Nebraska man was used to support evolution as a missing link It was presented in the museums and textbooks, shown in pictures in newspapers, as a missing link. They had enough fossil evidence that they could tell what environment Nebraska man lived in, what his wife and kids looked like, and what they ate. It was examined by leading authorities from 26 institutions across Europe and the US and classified as a missing link...

You write a post purporting to show the lies of evolution proponents...Yet, every single sentence in the first part of this paragraph is a straight lie.
 
Upvote 0

Brightmoon

Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.
Mar 2, 2018
6,297
5,539
NYC
✟166,950.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
C00E2C23-AC4F-4D2D-9E9C-75EF2EE1925C.png
Can I support my claims of course I can .

This is a screenshot of part of AiG statement of faith. ( I can’t link, sorry) If you disagree with their science based info , they simply do not accept your evidence. Real scientists test to see if evidence is factual ( even if they don’t like you or the evidence) . The people who work for AiG aren’t real scientists
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
. “Piltdown man” was never formally described by scientists because the owner never allowed a close examination of it. Then you had newspapers popularize the skull. It was a deliberate fake.

and yet it had hundreds of peer reviewed papers on it and museum displays assuring us it proved evolution. I agree it was a fake.


“Nebraska man” was newspaper hype . Newspapers blew the discovery out of proportion and named the fossil . Pig teeth superficially do look like human teeth and with a cursory exam it is easy to make that mistake. The mistake was corrected soon after the discovery of the tooth but more than 50 years later , creationists still think this is relevant somehow.

in fact also in museums and textbooks and It was examined by leading authorities from 26 institutions across Europe and the US and classified as a missing link. It shows how evolutionist will lie to indoctrinate and see what they want to see out of fossils. How is that not relevant to the thread?


What about archaeopteryx? It is a Dino bird . It has traits of both lineages . It’s not a fake , it’s not even unique as there are a lot of Dino bird and feathered dinosaurs coming out of China recently

Archaeoraptor. Not archaeopteryx, that is the other thread.
 
Upvote 0

Tolkien R.R.J

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,093
316
41
Virginia
✟102,563.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
View attachment 239694 Can I support my claims of course I can .

This is a screenshot of part of AiG statement of faith. ( I can’t link, sorry) If you disagree with their science based info , they simply do not accept your evidence. Real scientists test to see if evidence is factual ( even if they don’t like you or the evidence) . The people who work for AiG aren’t real scientists

I am sorry where does it say what you claim? I saw it had a statement on being christian and accepting creation. But i agree scientist should let the evidence lead to their beliefs, that is why many of those AIG and creationist, were evolutionist and know are creationist like i did. But what does this have to do with evolutionist lying about fossils to get people to agree with their faith?
 
Upvote 0

46AND2

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
Sep 5, 2012
5,807
2,210
Vancouver, WA
✟109,603.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
and yet it had hundreds of peer reviewed papers on it and museum displays assuring us it proved evolution. I agree it was a fake.

"Never formally described by scientists," as Moon said, means it was in ZERO peer reviewed papers.

I think maybe you should fact check your sources before you post them. Otherwise, you just end up repeating the lies you've been told.

If it was in hundreds of peer reviewed papers, it shouldn't be too difficult to cite a couple of them to support your case, right?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: ArchieRaptor
Upvote 0