Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Ape Man: Truth or Fiction?
NOTHINGNESS
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 190 (132161)
08-09-2004 10:58 PM


First of all, we all know that a tooth was found around 1922 in Nebraska. This simple tooth, and a little imagination the tooth was connected to a mythological jaw bone, the jawbone was connected to a skull, the skull was connected to a skeleton , and the skeleton was given a face, features, and fur.
All of this from a simple tooth. After that, an identical tooth was found by geologist Harold Cook. This time the tooth was attached to an actual skull, and the skull was attached to an actual skull of a WILD PIG.
Nebraska man, known by Hesperopithecus haroldcookii, has been unmasked as a myth rather than a man. IRONICALLY, WHILE SCIENTISTS WERE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A MONKEY OUT OF A PIG, THE PIG MADE A MONKEY OUT OF THE SCIENTISTS.
And then came Pithecanthropus erectus (Homo erectus or Java Man) the ape-man that walked erect. Java man consists of nothing more than a skullcap, a femur (thigh bone), three teeth, and a great deal of imagination. Even worse, is the fact that the femur was found fifty feet from the skullcap and a full year later.
And then you also have to consider that fact that for thirty years , Dubois(the founder) downplayed his discovery of two human skulls 9the Wadjak skulls), which he found in close proximity to his original finds. This alone should have been sufficient to disqualify Java man as humankind’s ancestor.
The famous evolutionist, Sir Arthur Keith, drove this point:
If, on his return in 894, (Dubois) had placed before the anthropologists of the time the —ape-like skull from Trinil( the skull of Java man0 side by side with the great —brained skulls of Wadjak, both fossilized, both from the same region of Java, he would have given them a meal beyond the powers of their mental digestion. Since then our digestions have grown stronger.
Of course, Keith was speaking to underscore the fact that those in his own profession have become increasingly gullible.
Pithecanthropus erectus can best be described as a fraud. The jaw of an ape was stained to make it appear as though it matched a human skull; the Piltdown fossils alog with accompanying bones were not only stained but also reshaped.
The file marks on the orangutan teeth of the lower jaw were clearly visible. The molars were misaligned and filed at two different angles. The canine tooth had been filed at two different angles. The canine tooth had een filed down so far that the pulp cavit had been exposed and then plugged.
Pildown fossils were clearly doctored, yet, esteemed scientist in the field affirmed their veracity. Sir Arthur Keith and A.S. Woodward, declared that Piiltdown man represents more closely than any human from yet discovered the common ancestor from which both the Neanderthal and modern types have been derived.
In 1953 , after the Nature Conservancy had spend a considerable amount of taxpayer money to designate the Piltdown site as anational monument, that Dawson’s Dawn man (piltdown0 was formally declared a fake.
This notorious scientific fraud was used for —forty years- to dupe unsuspecting students into thinking that evolution was a fact.
Peking Man: Peking man might be be described as pure fantasy. Lke Nebraska man, Peking man was based originally on a dusty old tooth. It was conveniently discovered in China, just as Canadian physician Davidson Black was about to run out of funds for his —evolutionary explorations in 1927.
The Rockefeller Foundation rewarded this discover with a generous grant, permitting Black to continue digging. Two years later, Peking mans’s raincase, and he estimated Peking man to be half a million years old. Unfortunately, Blacks’ fame was fleeting, for at age forty-nine.
Fourteen skulls were discovered after his death, along with tools and teeth.
The photographs and plasters casts tht remained had some interesting similarities. Apart from the fact that the lower skeletons were missing.
The skulls had all been bashed at the base. As ian Tayloer points out, Teilhard de Chardin of piltdown fame made his former professor, marcellin Boule, angry ‘at having traveled halfway around the world to see a battered monkey skull.
He pointed out that all the evidence indicated that true man was in charge of some sort of ‘-industry- and that the skulls found were merely those of monkeys. It now seems likely that the tools foud with peking man were used on him, not by him. As it turns out, while monkey meat is difficult to digest, monkey brains are delicious.
To this day, natives of Southeast Asia lop off the heads of monkeys, ash them in at the back, scoop out the brains, and eat them as a delicacy. You could easily declare that - Peking Man(monkey) was the main menu for lunch.
This message has been edited by NOTHINGNESS, 08-09-2004 09:59 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 08-09-2004 11:08 PM NOTHINGNESS has not replied
 Message 4 by Coragyps, posted 08-09-2004 11:12 PM NOTHINGNESS has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 190 (132164)
08-09-2004 11:02 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 3 of 190 (132166)
08-09-2004 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by NOTHINGNESS
08-09-2004 10:58 PM


yawn
another witless ramble that looks like a paste job from one of the less credible creatortionista sites.
care to discuss creationist hoaxes that continue to be perpetuated on the gullible believers even after being shown to be hoaxes and even disregarded by some creationist sites?
expect a barrage on this one. I have to be away for another week now and cannot take the time to have fun with it: I'll have to catch up later.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-09-2004 10:58 PM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 4 of 190 (132168)
08-09-2004 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by NOTHINGNESS
08-09-2004 10:58 PM


YAWWWWWNNNN!!
You do realize, don't you, that the elaboration of the "possible primate tooth" of "Nebraska Man" was done in the 1920's equivalent of the Weekly World News? You know, the tabloid that tells us that "half the hookers in America are space aliens - with no sex organs!"? And why do you care so passionately about these fossils found over a lifetime ago? Don't you think we've learned a little since then?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-09-2004 10:58 PM NOTHINGNESS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 12:30 AM Coragyps has not replied

  
NOTHINGNESS
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 190 (132195)
08-10-2004 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Coragyps
08-09-2004 11:12 PM


Monkey Business?
I believe you might need to take a nap A lot of people project strenth, when in fact they are weak. People try to brush off the facts when it isn't in their favor, but mock evidence when it is presented in front of their face.
First of all, I would like to know if the Nebraska man wasn't made up based on a single tooth? Yes? No? You tell me the facts about Nebraska man, considering the facts were not projected properly.
I would like to know why then do they still teach this as fact? If it isn't true, they shouldn't teach it. What part isn't true?
Yawnnnnnnnnnn.......waiting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Coragyps, posted 08-09-2004 11:12 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by pink sasquatch, posted 08-10-2004 12:36 AM NOTHINGNESS has replied
 Message 7 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 12:45 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 6 of 190 (132199)
08-10-2004 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by NOTHINGNESS
08-10-2004 12:30 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
Regarding the Nebraska man, NOTHINGNESS writes:
I would like to know why then do they still teach this as fact? If it isn't true, they shouldn't teach it.
Who teaches it as fact? Where? Do you have an example of a lesson plan or a textbook?
I would like a specific example of where it is taught - not a general statement.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 12:30 AM NOTHINGNESS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 3:07 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 7 of 190 (132209)
08-10-2004 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by NOTHINGNESS
08-10-2004 12:30 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
In the early part of the century a rancher and geologist, Harold Cook, found a human looking tooth in Nebraska. He sent it to paleontologist Henry Osborn. Osborn thought it looked apelike and announced a possible find. He made many casts of the tooth and sent them all over the world for experts to examine.
Most had serious doubts about the tooth. An illustrator for a popular magazine of the time, (think National Enquirer), did a highly imaginative drawing of an apeman.
Scientists of the time NEVER embraced the find as anything of importance. It was the popular press that touted it as a "missing link" type and played up the find. With more evidence gathering and further testing, SCIENCE showed the initial interpretation to be wrong.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 12:30 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
NOTHINGNESS
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 190 (132246)
08-10-2004 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by pink sasquatch
08-10-2004 12:36 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
I personally had books, and field trips to museums, demonstrating that this was factual. Honostly, you cannot tell me that you have never heard this, or read any books during your years in school?
How are you supposed to forget that stuff when it is embedded into our brain?
All you need to do is go look up your own Evolutionary Library/site, and I guarantee you will find out where these book,magazines,newspapers, tv, follow up on these sort of facts.
At least Asqara, who posted below you, confirms what I am saying. I can understand if he does not agree with me, but I see he is willing to be objective about the facts.
By the way, one interesting thing that you can check up for yourself also. The one thing that a lot of people might miss about the fossil findings, is the fact that the inner structure of the ears plays a major role in determining what the fossil is. This structure helps keep humans in upright position.
Obviously, some monkeys will lift themselves upright on a temporary basis. However, their inner ear structure does not support their ability to walk upright permanently.
Everybody checks the arthritic posture of "Lucy' , and found it was just a human being with arthritis, rickets and (calcium deficiency).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by pink sasquatch, posted 08-10-2004 12:36 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by NosyNed, posted 08-10-2004 3:14 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied
 Message 11 by Andya Primanda, posted 08-10-2004 4:16 AM NOTHINGNESS has replied
 Message 15 by CK, posted 08-10-2004 9:25 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied
 Message 16 by Coragyps, posted 08-10-2004 10:15 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied
 Message 17 by Percy, posted 08-10-2004 11:43 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied
 Message 18 by Asgara, posted 08-10-2004 11:43 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 9 of 190 (132249)
08-10-2004 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS
08-10-2004 3:07 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
I personally had books, and field trips to museums, demonstrating that this was factual. Honostly, you cannot tell me that you have never heard this, or read any books during your years in school?
How are you supposed to forget that stuff when it is embedded into our brain?
If "this" is Nebraska man then you are simply remembering wrong. You did not have such things.
Everybody checks the arthritic posture of "Lucy' , and found it was just a human being with arthritis, rickets and (calcium deficiency).
You will have to support what you say with references. You have this very, very wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 3:07 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
almeyda
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 190 (132262)
08-10-2004 4:13 AM


Any creationists or curious evolutionists, can have a listen of this. Its an 11 minute talk with Carl Wieland on ape-men.
Media | Answers in Genesis
Ape-men have usually ended up being frauds, or an imaginary evolutionary opinion on what it may have looked. Whereas theyve only found a few bones here and there. And the rest is illustration to indoctrinate the education system into evolution. My argument is that mans always been smart. Theres never been an up bringing through apes to humans. The earliest civilizations are known to be around 6000yrs ago, exactly according to the Bibles timeline. Yet we see evolutionists who reject the historical record and claim there were homosapiens 100,000yrs ago. And all the rest of it. If he did exist that long ago, why did he leave nothing behind, why did he do nothing, yet 2000BC built the pyramids?
This message has been edited by almeyda, 08-10-2004 03:16 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by contracycle, posted 08-10-2004 5:28 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 13 by mark24, posted 08-10-2004 5:32 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 14 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 08-10-2004 8:45 AM almeyda has not replied
 Message 19 by Darwin Storm, posted 08-10-2004 1:20 PM almeyda has not replied

  
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 190 (132264)
08-10-2004 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS
08-10-2004 3:07 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
quote:
I personally had books, and field trips to museums, demonstrating that this was factual. Honostly, you cannot tell me that you have never heard this, or read any books during your years in school?
How are you supposed to forget that stuff when it is embedded into our brain?
Your books are creationist material. That museum was a creationist museum. It seems that your education is sooo... creationistic!
quote:
All you need to do is go look up your own Evolutionary Library/site, and I guarantee you will find out where these book,magazines,newspapers, tv, follow up on these sort of facts.
Fossil Hominids: the evidence for human evolution
That is an evolutionist website. Sure, it _does_ have references to Nebraska man and Piltdown man, but only acknowledging their status as a mistake and a fraud. Last time I saw ape-men on TV [the 'Walking with Caveman'] series it was depicting australopiths. You do know that scientists have unearthed many apeman bones in Africa and elsewhere, don't you?
quote:
By the way, one interesting thing that you can check up for yourself also. The one thing that a lot of people might miss about the fossil findings, is the fact that the inner structure of the ears plays a major role in determining what the fossil is. This structure helps keep humans in upright position.
Obviously, some monkeys will lift themselves upright on a temporary basis. However, their inner ear structure does not support their ability to walk upright permanently.
Fred Spoor's studies? Of course he also pointed out that this does not imply that the 'ape-men' cannot walk upright. From Creationist Arguments: Semicircular Canals:
Spoor et al. did not say that australopithecines did not walk upright. Rather, they interpreted their results as showing that they were not obligatory bipeds, as we are, but part-time bipeds, and not as accomplished at bipedalism as humans are. Claiming that australopithecines were still partly bipedal is not a desperate attempt to retain an intermediate status for them, as Catchpoole implies, but a recognition of the fact that the evidence for bipedality in australopithecines is extremely strong.
quote:
Everybody checks the arthritic posture of "Lucy' , and found it was just a human being with arthritis, rickets and (calcium deficiency).
You've been deceived. Who told you that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 3:07 AM NOTHINGNESS has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-11-2004 1:43 AM Andya Primanda has not replied

  
contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 190 (132270)
08-10-2004 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by almeyda
08-10-2004 4:13 AM


quote:
Yet we see evolutionists who reject the historical record and claim there were homosapiens 100,000yrs ago. And all the rest of it. If he did exist that long ago, why did he leave nothing behind, why did he do nothing, yet 2000BC built the pyramids?
Well, he DID leave things behind - stone axes, sundry other tools, cave paintings, fire-marks, and of course, human hand-prints.
quote:
Oldest Jewelry? "Beads" Discovered in African Cave
Humans may have been wearing jewelry as far back as 75,000 years ago, about 30,000 years earlier than previously thought, if 41 shells found at Blombos Cave in South Africa prove to have been used as beads.
The shells are from a tiny mollusk, Nassarius kraussianus, that lived in a nearby estuary. They have perforations and wear marks consistent with being used as beads, according to scientists excavating the middle Stone Age site.
Beads are considered definitive evidence of symbolic thinking, which many scientists don't think occurred in modern humans until about 45,000 years ago ...
Zinken: [07] Prehistoric Art

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by almeyda, posted 08-10-2004 4:13 AM almeyda has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 13 of 190 (132271)
08-10-2004 5:32 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by almeyda
08-10-2004 4:13 AM


almeyda,
Yet we see evolutionists who reject the historical record and claim there were homosapiens 100,000yrs ago. And all the rest of it. If he did exist that long ago, why did he leave nothing behind, why did he do nothing, yet 2000BC built the pyramids?
Pick up any general archaeology book to falsify your claim.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by almeyda, posted 08-10-2004 4:13 AM almeyda has not replied

  
Darwin's Terrier
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 190 (132304)
08-10-2004 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by almeyda
08-10-2004 4:13 AM


Ape-men have usually ended up being frauds, or an imaginary evolutionary opinion on what it may have looked. Whereas theyve only found a few bones here and there.
That's odd. My copy of Klein seems to be stuffed full of genuine fossils.
Perhaps you could tell us please whether KNM-WT 15000 is ape or human? Unless it's a fake (if so, please substantiate), it looks like we've got more than a few bones. Here he is:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by almeyda, posted 08-10-2004 4:13 AM almeyda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 1:30 PM Darwin's Terrier has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 15 of 190 (132309)
08-10-2004 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS
08-10-2004 3:07 AM


Re: Monkey Business?
You have made a number of assumptions and have yet to provide us with a single reference or textbook to support your claim.
Do you have anything at all or is it just feeble-minded drivel?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by NOTHINGNESS, posted 08-10-2004 3:07 AM NOTHINGNESS has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024