You made an insulting and serious accusation of widespread scientific fraud, such that many Biologists must be conspiring to falsify their data in order to promote a shared social agenda.
Support this claim or withdraw it.
Message 176I am saying there have been many frauds that have been caught.
How many are there that have not been caught.
I asked you to stop putting words in my mouth.
I hope the following examples satisfy you if they don't go find your own all you have to do is type evolution fraud into yahoo search and you can find 306,000 sites. Google gives 2,220,000 sites.
Evolution Fraud and MythsWe already had Piltdown man.
Nebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 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.
Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his "missing link"). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52)
Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. (source: "Skull fragment may not be human", Knoxville News-Sentinel, 1983)
Neanderthal: Still synonymous with brutishness, the first Neanderthal remains were found in France in 1908. Considered to be ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging, 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. (source: "Upgrading Neanderthal Man", Time Magazine, May 17, 1971, Vol. 97, No. 20)
Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny?
Haekel's faked embryonic drawings
The theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860's, promoting Darwin's theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, "Fraud Rediscovered", Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51)
Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis:
Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor
The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, 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.
"Feathers For T-Rex?", Christopher P. Sloan, National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pp.99,100,105
Interesting Quote - "National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism" Storrs L. Olson, Smithsonian Institution
Brontosaurus: One of the best known dinosaurs in books and museums for the past hundred years, brontosaurus never really existed. 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. (source: Paul S. Taylor, The Great Dinosaur Mystery and the Bible, [Chariot Victor Publishing, 1989], pp.12-13)
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/molecular_biology_09.html
The most generally respected study on the origin of life is the Miller experiment conducted by the American researcher Stanley Miller in 1953. (The experiment is also known as the "Urey-Miller experiment" because of the contribution of Miller's instructor at the University of Chicago, Harold Urey.) This experiment is the only "evidence" evolutionists have with which to allegedly prove the "chemical evolution thesis"; they advance it as the first stage of the supposed evolutionary process leading to life. Although nearly half a century has passed, and great technological advances have been made, nobody has made any further progress. In spite of this, Miller's experiment is still taught in textbooks as the evolutionary explanation of the earliest generation of living things. That is because, aware of the fact that such studies do not support, but rather actually refute, their thesis, evolutionist researchers deliberately avoid embarking on such experiments.
Today, Miller's experiment is totally disregarded even by evolutionist scientists. In the February 1998 issue of the famous evolutionist science journal Earth, the following statements appear in an article titled "Life's Crucible":
Geologist now think that the primordial atmosphere consisted mainly of carbon dioxide and nitrogen, gases that are less reactive than those used in the 1953 experiment. And even if Miller's atmosphere could have existed, how do you get simple molecules such as amino acids to go through the necessary chemical changes that will convert them into more complicated compounds, or polymers, such as proteins? Miller himself throws up his hands at that part of the puzzle. "It's a problem," he sighs with exasperation. "How do you make polymers? That's not so easy."259
In brief, neither Miller's experiment, nor any other similar one that has been attempted, can answer the question of how life emerged on earth. All of the research that has been done shows that it is impossible for life to emerge by chance, and thus confirms that life is created. The reason evolutionists do not accept this obvious reality is their blind adherence to prejudices that are totally unscientific. Interestingly enough, Harold Urey, who organized the Miller experiment with his student Stanley Miller, made the following confession on this subject:
All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel it is too complex to have evolved anywhere. We all believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that its complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did.261
The Evolution of the Horse exhibition in London's Natural History Museum. This and other "evolution of the horse" diagrams show independent species which lived at different times and in different places, lined up one after the other in a very subjective presentation. In reality, there are no scientific discoveries regarding the evolution of the horse.
The evolutionist science writer Gordon R. Taylor explains this little-acknowledged truth in his book The Great Evolution Mystery:
But perhaps the most serious weakness of Darwinism is the failure of paleontologists to find convincing phylogenies or sequences of organisms demonstrating major evolutionary change... The horse is often cited as the only fully worked-out example. But the fact is that the line from Eohippus to Equus is very erratic. It is alleged to show a continual increase in size, but the truth is that some variants were smaller than Eohippus, not larger. Specimens from different sources can be brought together in a convincing-looking sequence, but there is no evidence that they were actually ranged in this order in time.156
http://www.amnh.org/...sures/Evolution_of_Horses/horses.html
Cladistics, which the Museum has played an important role in developing, is the grouping of organisms by shared, specialized characteristics; each time a new evolutionary feature appears, a new branch grows on the evolutionary tree, comprising organisms that have both the old traits and the new one. Thus the display in the back shows that some later horses, such as Calippus, are actually smaller than earlier ones, and that other later horses, such as Neohipparion, still had three toes. This display is therefore both a classic demonstration of evolution and a paradigm of scientific method at the Museum.
LUCY:
http://www.omniology.com/LucySkeletons.html
8 UN-ETHICAL EXAMPLES OF ACADEMIC LICENSE OR FRAUD BY SELF AGGRANDIZING (MACRO-EVOLUTIONARY) "EXPERTS" WHO HOLD THEIR INTERPRETATIONS TO BE INFALLIBLY TRUE.
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/textbook-fraud-biologist.htm
J: "Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don't believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures - everything would stop. I'd be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn't earn a decent living."
Dead MothsGlued To The Trees![And More Evolution Frauds Exposed!]
How did they get on the trees for the photos and films? Two ways, both more dishonest than the Piltdown man hoax:
1) They were LABORATORY-BRED. The moths filmed being eaten by the birds were placed onto tree trunks by Kettlewell; they were so languid that he once had to warm them up on the hood of his car.
2) DEAD moths were GLUED to the trees! U-Mass biologist Theodore Sargent confessed to the dirty deed for a NOVA documentary. He also admitted that textbooks and films have featured "a lot of fraudulent photographs"
http://biobulletin.amnh.org/D/2/3/index.html
Where did modern horses come from?
Modern species of horses, such as the common horse, Equus caballus, evolved on the North American continent and migrated across the Bering land bridge into what is now Siberia. From there, horses spread across Asia into Europe and south to the Middle East and northern Africa. At the end of the Pleistocene epoch”about 10,000 years ago”a set of devastating extinctions took place in North and South America. Many large mammal species died out on the American continents, including mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, and all horse species. (The cause of these extinctions is unknown.
Page Not Found | UCI School of Humanities%
20Lecture.doc
Closer to home, and to our quarter, is the Meadowcroft Rockshelter in Avella, PA, evidence of human occupation that is 14,000-17,000 yrs. Old; Cactus Hill, VA, where tools have been discovere in layers 15,050 years old; etc. Since the middle of North America was still covered by glacier until about 11,500 yrs. ago, these people could not have crossed the continent. Speculation is now that these people came from the Solutrean culture of France and the Iberian Peninsula, roughly following the a northern route along the edge of a glacer past Greenland and down from Newfoundland, roughly the same route as Norseman Lief Erikson around 1,000 AD
If many large mammal species died out on the American continents, including mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, and all horse species.
How did man survive? If man survived why did not the horses?
If horses had been tamed for 20,000 years, did these humans not have tame horses? Just food for thought.
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
™ Version 4.2