Piltdown man
a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman!
a lie and a fake 5 years by 1927.
Nebraska man
a lie and a fake for 40 years
by then everyone in the world thought they were from apes.
how did it take 40 years for the scientific community to find it was a clumsy fake?
Javaman (homo erectus)
discovered by Dr Dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon)
he had found human skulls in the same stratum did not tell anyone for 30 years!
a lie and he eventually renounced the javaman as a fraud himself
Peking man
Dr. black discovered it
a tooth and some ashes
soon after human remains were found mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans.
hey but they wanted an apeman! so they grabbed bits of both and made Peking Man!
1972
Richard Leaky
found a skull that supposedly blew evolution out of the water by 2.5 million years. the only thing left was
ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia.
It never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human.
Also there is such little evidence for apemen that the amount would not be accepted in any other field of science.
And there's plenty more evidence for the non-existenance of evolution!
(I know this is not what you like to hear, so just score me nothing as usual. Thanks)
Here we go again! WOW. Something different. Gee you really picked this one out from left field. Never heard anything like this before!
Well if Evolution is proved NOW then what was all the other proofs of apemen then. FAKES!!! Yes FAKES. Well maybe, just maybe these are fakes as well. They all are fake.
Hey we found a tooth of a pig, call it a million years old, quote it on slashdot, and voila, without any more ado we have evolution proved "once and for all" once again. Hey quick! Draw it into a picture of an apeman! Get the newspapers and select websites to publish it.
What happened to all the other proofs? HUH. Gee it's lucky to find something "just now" TM. Right when the ID v Evolution debate is hotting up. Well wouldn't you know it? Just found the proof we were looking for.
Yeah right.
piltdown man a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman fake 5 years by 1927
nebraska man a fake for 40 years
javaman homo erectus discovered by dr dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon) had found human skulls in the same stratum did not tell anyone for 30 years eventually renounced it himself
peking man Dr. black discovered it a tooth and some ashes soon after human remains mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans.
1972 richard leaky found a skull supposedly blew evolution out of the water. the only thing left was ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia.
such little evidence that would not be accepted in any other field of science it never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human.
(zero again please moderators)(great job)(you deserve a medal)
I'm firmly against evolution based on my own scientific research. And so every arguement I put forward gets scored a zero or close as the slashdot moderators don't like any other arguement.
Piltdown man a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman! a lie and a fake 5 years by 1927.
Nebraska man a lie and a fake for 40 years by then everyone in the world thought they were from apes. how did it take 40 years for the scientific community to find it was a clumsy fake?
Javaman (homo erectus) discovered by Dr Dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon) he had found human skulls in the same stratum did not tell anyone for 30 years! a lie and he eventually renounced the javaman as a fraud himself
Peking man Dr. black discovered it a tooth and some ashes soon after human remains were found mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans. hey but they wanted an apeman! so they grabbed bits of both and made Peking Man!
1972 Richard Leaky found a skull that supposedly blew evolution out of the water by 2.5 million years. the only thing left was ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia.
It never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human. Also there is such little evidence for apemen that the amount would not be accepted in any other field of science.
And there's plenty more evidence for the non-existenance of evolution!
(I know this is not what you like to hear, so just score me a 0 as usual. Thanks)
"The "missing link" hysteria in the media is ridiculous. How many times have we already found the "missing link"?"
I've pointed this subject line out before and I agree about the media hysteria. However the missing links of the past apemen were faked. Nabraska Man, Piltdown Man, etc. All faked. And well known now that they were faked. And it's nearly every week that we have a media and slashdot story promoting "The Missing Link" and the "facts" of evolution. Find a piece of bone or a few bones, looks like a skull, get an "artist" do to an "impression" of a running apeman chasing a deer and voila! the latest proof of evolution. Yeah, really scientific.
However when it's discovered that it's only 1000 years old and/or faked, there is no media hysteria and no slashdot story showing it's false.
And comments like mine are always modded down to 0 or -1 due to the fact that if you don't say what the moderators like to hear then they mod you down. Not that I give a damn actually!
People ARE influenced by what they see. That's why advertising works. Are they going to say advertising does not work? No one would believe you. To say that violent video does not effect kids is really dumb.
Actually the ones condemmed to death are the new human beings that are used for experimentation! And with your sentance about views being forced on others who believe something different, how about the scientists forcing THEIR views on the unborn to harvest them - forcing their scientific views saying we can harvest YOU for someone else... (and make tons of money on the side).
What if you pointed out to the Nazis that they should not be killing Jews? The Nazis would turn around and say what you say... don't force your views on us. Nazis believed Jews were "non-persons" so they could kill as many as they liked.
you may disbelieve that prayer caused the cures of these thousands of people and the cures that happen every day. However you cannot say that you disbelieve that the cures happen at all. I've been to Lourdes and so have many many doctors and specialists. They've looked into all the cures. Even some have witnessed them with their own eyes. The cures are real. If prayer does not cure them then what does?
you need not reply, but if you ever go overseas one day to France, go to the south of France to Lourdes and see for yourself. You won't be dissappointed.
[Hey, and to the moderators who only give points to people they agree with, rather than to someone who might make a valid arguement... I like being modded to zero!]
To respond to you comment about faith healing. The greatest by far is a small town in the south of France called Lourdes. Many, many people have been cured there. These cures have been verified by countless doctors and specialists in their respective fields.
The point is for science this should be falsifiable. Whether it can be proved true or false by scientific examination. The thousands of cures are real. There is no doubt about them now. The cures can be scientifically proven. However the *reason* the cures happened outside the sphere of science.
The cures happened because of faith and prayer.
Now science or some people *into* science don't believe in God or prayer so think praying for a cure will not work without even looking into whether it would or not. I think that some scientists think that if it cannot be proved by science then it cannot be proved at all. That's a very arrogant line to take. They want to stick to Darwins slow evolution at all costs rather than honestly look into the instant that could happen with God.
Perhaps there are things in the universe that are outside the field of science or not measurable by any scientific method known to science *right* now. However because science cannot measure the value of a prayer for instance does not mean that it does not work! Quite the opposite in fact as the thousands of Lourdes cures prove.
So here is the problem for the scientist. Thousands of people pray for a cure. The cure happens and is outside of current known science or technology. A cure such as happened already at Lourdes like, 4-6 inches of leg bone grown back in a day, a blind woman with severed optic nerves is able to see again and read quite well even with the optic nerves still cut, a WW1 wounded soldier in a wheelchair and on a pension because half his body is paralyzed and a 4 inch hole in his head gets up out of bed at Lourdes and starts running with the paralysis gone and the hole in his head virtually closed up overnight.
How does the *honest* scientist deal with the unknown but that which is provably true? How does the scientist deal with miracles?
Well i don't know what the cancer cure rate is... but cancer cures are not only what happens there.
Blind people recieve their sight. One case Mme Bire a french woman had both optic nerves cut. Yet her sight returned even though the optic nerves were still gone. She had permanent normal eyesight from then on.
Other people have had instant bone replacement where, say, 6 inches of missing leg bone replaced in a day.
Still others who were paraplegic get up and walk.
All this is well documented, eye witnessed by both layman and specialist alike and open for everyone to see.
There is a town in the south of France where many miracle cures have happened and indeed are still happening, and it's called Lourdes. It is no longer doubted that these miracles happen. It is also no longer doubted how to make these miracles happen and it could certainly be called scientific method. Everyone is free to look into the cures of Lourdes. Many scientists and specialists doctors (thousands) have joined the Medical Bureau in Lourdes to study the cures and document them happening. In short these cures happen because of prayer to God. Also the cures are instant. To read more on Lourdes you can search the web and there are some URL's below.
Some Cures (the people who have been healed call themselves Cures) have had internal operations undone after the cancer that caused the operation to be performed was cured. However the operation scars have remained. No blind cancer ray gun type of instrument - if there was one - would have intelligence to undo an operation after curing the disease. Many X-rays etc, support all the findings.
Evolution does not support this. ID does. And if you think this is all hogwash... go to Lourdes and see for yourself!
Yes it was Uganda. The government said that you have to stop your risky behavior or you'll die. So they did. It was the change of behavior that did it... not more condoms.
To quote you "a challenge to scientific understanding, and the scientific method".
How does the manufacture of all the fake apemen like Javaman, Piltdown man, Nebraska man, Lucy, etc. show scientific method? I wish someone could explain this to me. It is well known now that all these were faked. If evolution was so easy to prove then these would not have to be faked. But they were faked and backed by the scientific community for a long time, paraded in all the newspapers for years, and now everyone believes in evolution.
When they were discovered as fakes, there was not a whisper from the scientific community about their scientific method, and no retraction from the newspapers saying we were wrong.
If evolution is real then where are all the "in-between" animals? For instance show me a quarter-turtle, then a half-turtle, then a three-quarter turtle - anywhere? There are none. Point me to a URL where there is fossil pictures of partly evolved turtles.
No, I don't believe in evolution. There's no evidence.
Things like...
The incorruptables (bodies of saints that don't decompose),
Lourdes cures (miraculous healings verified by literally THOUSANDS of scientists),
Eucharistic miracles (many scientifically verified and more under study),
to name a few...
These things are there for everyone to see. Many great scientists have even EYE-WITNESSED Lourdes healings in progress. Like world renowned Dr. Alexis Carrel (Nobel Scientist) who witnessed one cure PERSONALLY.
Read about it here http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/australia/acts1518 .html
But hey you wouldn't want to KNOW about these.
It just might make your ID bashing a little bit insecure...
Those so-called scientific scientists couldn't prove evolution so *created* fake apemen like Java man, Piltdown man, Nabraska man, etc, that are STILL being taught in schools as REAL when it is well known now that they were faked! If all these so-called scientists want to be true to their name, why not come out and tell the world all about the fake apemen and demand they be REMOVED from school textbooks. If they don't want creationism, then first remove their OWN creations!
His words (originally in French) were...
"Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis."
Also could have been "... more than ONE hypothesis" as French une can be "a" or "one" though probably the word "a".
Does this mean that the pope was endorsing evolution?
A: Actually, no. "His point was that evolution was now accepted by a wide range of scientific disciplines doing independent research."
Native French-speakers say that if the pope had wanted to include himself among those endorsing evolution, French idiom would have required him to use a different construction.
According to them, the way the sentence reads in French implies only that the evidence accumulated over the last fifty years has led a group of people to a recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis, but the pope is neither including or excluding himself in that category, merely stating that it exists. If he had wanted to include himself, he would have used a different construction.
Slashdot Mirror
Piltdown man a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman! a lie and a fake 5 years by 1927. Nebraska man a lie and a fake for 40 years by then everyone in the world thought they were from apes. how did it take 40 years for the scientific community to find it was a clumsy fake? Javaman (homo erectus) discovered by Dr Dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon) he had found human skulls in the same stratum did not tell anyone for 30 years! a lie and he eventually renounced the javaman as a fraud himself Peking man Dr. black discovered it a tooth and some ashes soon after human remains were found mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans. hey but they wanted an apeman! so they grabbed bits of both and made Peking Man! 1972 Richard Leaky found a skull that supposedly blew evolution out of the water by 2.5 million years. the only thing left was ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia. It never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human. Also there is such little evidence for apemen that the amount would not be accepted in any other field of science. And there's plenty more evidence for the non-existenance of evolution! (I know this is not what you like to hear, so just score me nothing as usual. Thanks)
Here we go again! WOW. Something different. Gee you really picked this one out from left field. Never heard anything like this before!
Well if Evolution is proved NOW then what was all the other proofs of apemen then. FAKES!!! Yes FAKES. Well maybe, just maybe these are fakes as well. They all are fake.
Hey we found a tooth of a pig, call it a million years old, quote it on slashdot, and voila, without any more ado we have evolution proved "once and for all" once again. Hey quick! Draw it into a picture of an apeman! Get the newspapers and select websites to publish it.
What happened to all the other proofs? HUH.
Gee it's lucky to find something "just now" TM. Right when the ID v Evolution debate is hotting up. Well wouldn't you know it? Just found the proof we were looking for.
Yeah right.
piltdown man
a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman
fake 5 years by 1927
nebraska man
a fake for 40 years
javaman homo erectus
discovered by dr dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon)
had found human skulls in the same stratum
did not tell anyone for 30 years
eventually renounced it himself
peking man
Dr. black discovered it
a tooth and some ashes
soon after human remains mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans.
1972
richard leaky
found a skull
supposedly blew evolution out of the water. the only thing left was ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia.
such little evidence that would not be accepted in any other field of science
it never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human.
(zero again please moderators)(great job)(you deserve a medal)
Yes that's right.
I'm firmly against evolution based on my own scientific research. And so every arguement I put forward gets scored a zero or close as the slashdot moderators don't like any other arguement.
Perhaps we should move slashdot to China!
Piltdown man
a tooth of a pig drawn into an apeman!
a lie and a fake 5 years by 1927.
Nebraska man
a lie and a fake for 40 years
by then everyone in the world thought they were from apes.
how did it take 40 years for the scientific community to find it was a clumsy fake?
Javaman (homo erectus)
discovered by Dr Dubois and he himself declared in 1938 that it was just a monkey (gibbon)
he had found human skulls in the same stratum did not tell anyone for 30 years!
a lie and he eventually renounced the javaman as a fraud himself
Peking man
Dr. black discovered it
a tooth and some ashes
soon after human remains were found mixed with animal remains. the animal remains were the food of the humans.
hey but they wanted an apeman! so they grabbed bits of both and made Peking Man!
1972
Richard Leaky
found a skull that supposedly blew evolution out of the water by 2.5 million years. the only thing left was
ramapithecus. just some fragments of jaw bones and some teeth. the same size and shape as a babboon in ethiopia.
It never has been found and it never will be found a creature that is more than brute and less than human.
Also there is such little evidence for apemen that the amount would not be accepted in any other field of science.
And there's plenty more evidence for the non-existenance of evolution!
(I know this is not what you like to hear, so just score me a 0 as usual. Thanks)
"The "missing link" hysteria in the media is ridiculous. How many times have we already found the "missing link"?"
I've pointed this subject line out before and I agree about the media hysteria. However the missing links of the past apemen were faked. Nabraska Man, Piltdown Man, etc. All faked. And well known now that they were faked. And it's nearly every week that we have a media and slashdot story promoting "The Missing Link" and the "facts" of evolution. Find a piece of bone or a few bones, looks like a skull, get an "artist" do to an "impression" of a running apeman chasing a deer and voila! the latest proof of evolution. Yeah, really scientific.
However when it's discovered that it's only 1000 years old and/or faked, there is no media hysteria and no slashdot story showing it's false.
And comments like mine are always modded down to 0 or -1 due to the fact that if you don't say what the moderators like to hear then they mod you down. Not that I give a damn actually!
Yes, I agree that's exactly what they should do.
and jail everyone they can that does not conform.
[and I don't give a damn about moderators scoring either! Just make it -1 as usual]
People ARE influenced by what they see.
That's why advertising works. Are they going to say advertising does not work? No one would believe you.
To say that violent video does not effect kids is really dumb.
Actually the ones condemmed to death are the new human beings that are used for experimentation!
And with your sentance about views being forced on others who believe something different, how about the scientists forcing THEIR views on the unborn to harvest them - forcing their scientific views saying we can harvest YOU for someone else... (and make tons of money on the side).
What if you pointed out to the Nazis that they should not be killing Jews? The Nazis would turn around and say what you say... don't force your views on us. Nazis believed Jews were "non-persons" so they could kill as many as they liked.
Life begins at conception.
How may evolutionists does it take to change a lightbulb?
None.
Given enough time it will screw in itself!
Here we go again with the weekly mandatory slashdot pro evolution story.
Hi Expert Determination, thanks for the reply.
8 .html8 .html
you may disbelieve that prayer caused the cures of these thousands of people and the cures that happen every day. However you cannot say that you disbelieve that the cures happen at all. I've been to Lourdes and so have many many doctors and specialists. They've looked into all the cures. Even some have witnessed them with their own eyes. The cures are real. If prayer does not cure them then what does?
you need not reply, but if you ever go overseas one day to France, go to the south of France to Lourdes and see for yourself. You won't be dissappointed.
If you would like some more reading on Lourdes then here are some links.
http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/england/b405.html
http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/australia/acts151
http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/australia/acts126
[Hey, and to the moderators who only give points to people they agree with, rather than to someone who might make a valid arguement... I like being modded to zero!]
To respond to you comment about faith healing. The greatest by far is a small town in the south of France called Lourdes. Many, many people have been cured there. These cures have been verified by countless doctors and specialists in their respective fields.
The point is for science this should be falsifiable. Whether it can be proved true or false by scientific examination. The thousands of cures are real. There is no doubt about them now. The cures can be scientifically proven. However the *reason* the cures happened outside the sphere of science.
The cures happened because of faith and prayer.
Now science or some people *into* science don't believe in God or prayer so think praying for a cure will not work without even looking into whether it would or not. I think that some scientists think that if it cannot be proved by science then it cannot be proved at all. That's a very arrogant line to take. They want to stick to Darwins slow evolution at all costs rather than honestly look into the instant that could happen with God.
Perhaps there are things in the universe that are outside the field of science or not measurable by any scientific method known to science *right* now. However because science cannot measure the value of a prayer for instance does not mean that it does not work! Quite the opposite in fact as the thousands of Lourdes cures prove.
So here is the problem for the scientist.
Thousands of people pray for a cure. The cure happens and is outside of current known science or technology. A cure such as happened already at Lourdes like, 4-6 inches of leg bone grown back in a day, a blind woman with severed optic nerves is able to see again and read quite well even with the optic nerves still cut, a WW1 wounded soldier in a wheelchair and on a pension because half his body is paralyzed and a 4 inch hole in his head gets up out of bed at Lourdes and starts running with the paralysis gone and the hole in his head virtually closed up overnight.
How does the *honest* scientist deal with the unknown but that which is provably true?
How does the scientist deal with miracles?
Well i don't know what the cancer cure rate is... but cancer cures are not only what happens there. Blind people recieve their sight. One case Mme Bire a french woman had both optic nerves cut. Yet her sight returned even though the optic nerves were still gone. She had permanent normal eyesight from then on. Other people have had instant bone replacement where, say, 6 inches of missing leg bone replaced in a day. Still others who were paraplegic get up and walk. All this is well documented, eye witnessed by both layman and specialist alike and open for everyone to see.
There is a town in the south of France where many miracle cures have happened and indeed are still happening, and it's called Lourdes. It is no longer doubted that these miracles happen. It is also no longer doubted how to make these miracles happen and it could certainly be called scientific method. Everyone is free to look into the cures of Lourdes. Many scientists and specialists doctors (thousands) have joined the Medical Bureau in Lourdes to study the cures and document them happening. In short these cures happen because of prayer to God. Also the cures are instant. To read more on Lourdes you can search the web and there are some URL's below.
8 .html
http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/england/b405.html
http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/australia/acts151
Some Cures (the people who have been healed call themselves Cures) have had internal operations undone after the cancer that caused the operation to be performed was cured. However the operation scars have remained. No blind cancer ray gun type of instrument - if there was one - would have intelligence to undo an operation after curing the disease. Many X-rays etc, support all the findings.
Evolution does not support this. ID does. And if you think this is all hogwash... go to Lourdes and see for yourself!
Yes it was Uganda.
The government said that you have to stop your risky behavior or you'll die. So they did.
It was the change of behavior that did it... not more condoms.
To quote you "a challenge to scientific understanding, and the scientific method".
How does the manufacture of all the fake apemen like Javaman, Piltdown man, Nebraska man, Lucy, etc. show scientific method? I wish someone could explain this to me. It is well known now that all these were faked. If evolution was so easy to prove then these would not have to be faked. But they were faked and backed by the scientific community for a long time, paraded in all the newspapers for years, and now everyone believes in evolution.
When they were discovered as fakes, there was not a whisper from the scientific community about their scientific method, and no retraction from the newspapers saying we were wrong.
If evolution is real then where are all the "in-between" animals? For instance show me a quarter-turtle, then a half-turtle, then a three-quarter turtle - anywhere? There are none. Point me to a URL where there is fossil pictures of partly evolved turtles.
No, I don't believe in evolution. There's no evidence.
These things are there for everyone to see. Many great scientists have even EYE-WITNESSED Lourdes healings in progress. Like world renowned Dr. Alexis Carrel (Nobel Scientist) who witnessed one cure PERSONALLY. Read about it here http://www.pamphlets.org.au/cts/australia/acts1518 .html
But hey you wouldn't want to KNOW about these. It just might make your ID bashing a little bit insecure...
Those so-called scientific scientists couldn't prove evolution so *created* fake apemen like Java man, Piltdown man, Nabraska man, etc, that are STILL being taught in schools as REAL when it is well known now that they were faked! If all these so-called scientists want to be true to their name, why not come out and tell the world all about the fake apemen and demand they be REMOVED from school textbooks. If they don't want creationism, then first remove their OWN creations!
They tried to EX-TER-MIN-ATE the opposition. Davros will not be happy...
His words (originally in French) were... "Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis." Also could have been "... more than ONE hypothesis" as French une can be "a" or "one" though probably the word "a". Does this mean that the pope was endorsing evolution? A: Actually, no. "His point was that evolution was now accepted by a wide range of scientific disciplines doing independent research." Native French-speakers say that if the pope had wanted to include himself among those endorsing evolution, French idiom would have required him to use a different construction. According to them, the way the sentence reads in French implies only that the evidence accumulated over the last fifty years has led a group of people to a recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis, but the pope is neither including or excluding himself in that category, merely stating that it exists. If he had wanted to include himself, he would have used a different construction.