EVOLUTIONARY FRAUDS

It is totally outrageous to think that scientists and educators would deceive society. But that is exactly what they seem to have done. In an attempt to further their careers and justify the claims that evolution is a legitimate theory, many scientists have fraudulently deceived the world by planting or reconstructing fossils which they would claim to be authentic finds. I have listed 6 famous examples.

The most infamous evolutionary fraud occurred in China and was published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic, November 1999. 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.

One of the best known dinosaurs in books and museums for the past hundred years, brontosaurus never really existed. In 1916 in Mongolia, the dinosaur’s skeleton was found with the head missing. To complete it, a skull found three or four miles away was added. No one knew this for years. The body actually belonged to a species of Diplodocus and the head was from an Apatosaurus.

Orce Man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1992, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. Five years later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old horse. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 19 year old man who lived 1.4 million years ago, and even had very detailed drawings done to represent what he would have looked like.

Nebraska Man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1912 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig. This fossil was part of the evidence entered to substantiate evolution in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial.

Piltdown Man: Found in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1919, this fossil was considered by some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the evolution of man--until it was found to be a complete forgery 61 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.

Neanderthal: Still synonymous with brutishness, the first Neanderthal remains were found in Germany in 1918. Considered to be ignorant and ape-like, much of the evidence now suggests that Neanderthal was just as human as us, and his stooped appearance was because of arthritis and rickets. Neanderthals are now recognized as skilled hunters, believers in an after-life, and even skilled surgeons, as seen in one skeleton whose withered right arm had been amputated above the elbow.
1,062 views 6 replies
Reply #1 Top
Marvin,
it is indeed completely unacceptable for anyone to comit fraud to further their careers. Just because some people have done this does not make the theory of evolution illegitimate. True many of the current assumptions on previous species will later proove to be false, but again this does not make the whole process where by species evolve false.

Paul.
Reply #2 Top
Marvin Cooley:

Yes and the stars are only 5000 years old too. But the problem is that God isn't here to trick us into believing that the universe is some synthetic creation where He purposely tries to fool us. There is no contradiction between the Bible and Science. Well, except in those who think God is some kind of cross between Santa Claus and a magician.
Reply #3 Top
I knew it!!! Death to all Scientists!!!!
Reply #4 Top


Marvin's merely making the point that evolutionists are no scientific purists.

Anybody who knows anything about science or philosophy knows that evidence does not translate itself. Instead a person's presuppositions (previously come to conclusions - based ultimately on Faith) are used as the bases of there current conclusions. IE. an evolutionist must beleive in the increase in complexity through chance and random processes (evolution) before he can prove it. A Creationist must belive in God and his literal 7 day Creation to prove the Creationist view. Evidence is merely a way to rationalise a situation to make it feasible in reality.
Needless to say Evolution hasn't done a good job at prooving itself - if it's an obvious fact...
Reply #5 Top
Sorry Higherdepth,
but I don't agree that a preposition is necessary to prove something. How many scientific breakthroughs were made with no prepositions? Most of the major fundamental breakthroughs fall into this category. The suggestion that scientists cannot look at evidence and make a conclusion without being prepositioned towards the answer is just throwing insults at scientists. Yes many scientists do indeed preposition results, but mamny more do not. That's the whole reason of pier review.

Paul.
Reply #6 Top
The theory if evolution is one the greatest deceptions of all time. I applaud Marvin Cooley for doing his part to expose it. Modern science itself contradicts and exposes it. For example: evolution states that species mutant over time to evolve into higher life forms when in fact in DNA 99.99% of the time whenever a mutation occurs it is always a subtraction or negative resulting in deformity. Also in biology there is the "Law of Bio-Genesis" that states life must come from life - something non living cannot become alive no matter what recipe of proteins and chemicals are put together. The Bible states that God created every creature after its own kind which is why a dog cannot be breeded with an elephant. And in the geological record there is what is called the "Biological Big Bang" where the is an explosion of all types of life appearing together in the same period - if life evolved gradually over time as evolution proposes then why does it not show in the geological record? Another point of interest I would like to make is about Sir Isaac Newton who discovered the law of gravity. In his day everyone believed the world was flat so he was ridiculed for suggesting otherwise. But Sir Isaac Newton was wise enough to stand upon his inspiration from the Bible based on a verse in Isaiah chapter 40 : "it is he (God) that sitteth upon the circle of the earth". It's not the Bilble that needs to catch up with science but it's science that needs to catch up to the Bible.