PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Evolutions hoaxes and mistakes

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The theory of evolution has had many hoaxes and big mistakes in it's past. They are usually presented as evidence first, then later, when shown they are false, are blown of as no big deal. Here are some examples:

Nebraska man.

Nebraska man was heralded as an evolution anscestor of ours. Nebraska man ever had a sketch of him in the Illustrated London News! What was this great scientific discovery? A tooth, which was later found to be a pigs.

Java man.

Java man was found by Dr. Eugene DuBois. It was a skullcap, thigh-bone, and some molars. Dubois later found human skulls in the same area, showing his java man was not really a transitional link. But instead of admitting this, he his the skulls under his floorboards for over 20 years! He eventually admitted his fault.

Piltdown man.

Piltdown man was found by Charles Dawson in 1912. He was made of a jaw, 2 molars, and a fragment of a skull. In the 1950's, the it was shown to be a hoax. The teeth were filed down, and the jaw was of an orangutan.

Orce man.

Orce man was found in 1982.  It was said at the time to be the oldest human remains ever found in europe. Later, they admitted it that the skull was probably from a 4-month old donkey.

Peppered moths.

Peppered moths are commonly used as evidence for evolution. They supposedly show adaption because of camoflauge in tree trunks. But the problem was, it was found out that peppered moths don't even stay on tree trunks. In fact, the pictures taken for textbooks were done by taking dead moths and gluing them to trees! Unfortunetly, this 'evidence' for evolution is still used today.

Archaeoraptor.

Archaeoraptor was a fossil found recently (1999) that supposedly showed the link between reptiles and birds. It looked like a bird, but had a tail like a reptile! This was quickly heralded by national geographic as an intermediate of birds and reptiles. However, it was found soonafter to be a fake!! Someone made a composite of a bird and a reptile tail.

Hoaxs and mistake happen all the time in evoltion. These are just some more famous examples. Are we ever supposed to believe what they say? I don't.


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 2:18 PM on October 23, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You know whats funny? If someone went and put up something dissproving stuff in the bible this bad, there would be people jumping all over it saying stuff to the extent of "I knew it! I knew there was something wrong in the bible, I have never believed it!"  but when someone goes and slams evolution, its like death valley in here, the atheists cant back it up, and the creationists dont feel they need to say anything make it look more ridiculous.


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 10:11 PM on October 24, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ok...you've found some flaws. yipee. A few discredited fossils doesn't discredit Evolution as a whole. There is no need to respond to this, in fact it proves the desperation of the creationism as a whole. Basically you've seized on a few disproven examples, and tried to cross-apply it to the whole theory, when you and I both know that is ridiculous.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 10:14 PM on October 24, 2002 | IP
mrmazet

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ah! Ignore this. The comment that was here really belongs in a different thread. I apolize for the inconvenience.

(Edited by mrmazet 10/24/2002 at 10:27 PM).
 


Posts: 122 | Posted: 10:25 PM on October 24, 2002 | IP
Sakata

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

There is no way you can turn this arguement around to the desperation on creationists, I mean read some of these arguements, atheists are screwing with evidence because they are so desperate for a missing link, they realise the farther down they dig, the more foolish they are looking, so they need to get some proof, any proof, thats why we have people coloring moths, and glueing birds and lizards together, they dont want to admit they are wrong .


-------
No time for mediocrity.

People call me a Bible-Thumping reactionist ...and I'm proud to bear the name.
 


Posts: 293 | Posted: 10:26 PM on October 24, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dsadevil, have you ever heard of embryonic recapitulation? The idea that when embryos are young, they look like embryos of other animals? It is used today in textbooks as evidence for evolution. Do you believe it is true?


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 11:38 PM on October 24, 2002 | IP
mrmazet

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Sakata at 10:26 PM on October 24, 2002 :
There is no way you can turn this arguement around to the desperation on creationists, I mean read some of these arguements, atheists are screwing with evidence because they are so desperate for a missing link, they realise the farther down they dig, the more foolish they are looking, so they need to get some proof, any proof, thats why we have people coloring moths, and glueing birds and lizards together, they dont want to admit they are wrong .


I find it a bit harsh to blame all evolution hoaxs on people not wanting their theory to be wrong since 1) not finding anything doesn't disprove evolution or prove creation and 2) they might just want attention.
 


Posts: 122 | Posted: 06:36 AM on October 25, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

the embroyo recapitulation I dont know about, but I have heard that embroyos have gills and a tail at some point in there development.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 2:43 PM on October 25, 2002 | IP
kc2gwx

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"the embroyo recapitulation I dont know about, but I have heard that embroyos have gills and a tail at some point in there development."

That is basically what embryonic recapitulation is. This was developed by Ernest Haeckel in the mid 1800's. Unfortunetly, this is still taught today. In fact, you seem to have learned it.

It was a hoax, plain and simple. Haeckel made up sketches of different embryos and made them to look alike. It was a complete lie. But guess what...it's still in textbooks.

You have been lied to, on purpose I might add, by evolutionists. How does it feel? This is the same with peppered moths, and perhaps every evidence ever shown as support for evolution.

Haeckel's lie.


-------
Sam, KC2GWX
 


Posts: 101 | Posted: 3:23 PM on October 25, 2002 | IP
fallingupwards84

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

evolutionists have continually lied to the public time after time again because they are afraid that their theory will be debunked. the examples that were given in the first post were just a few of the many examples of evolutionists lying. evolution is a hoax and a scientific conspiracy.


-------
i am a liberal chrisitian and proud of it!!!

"Those who produce should have, but we know that those who produce the most - that is, those who work hardest, and at the most difficult and most menial tasks, have the least." - Eugene Debs
 


Posts: 971 | Posted: 8:56 PM on November 19, 2002 | IP
Cool-Hand-Dave

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

honestly folks, i think it would be more than safe to assume that both evolutionists and creationists have lied about their theories.  I think they work on the same policy as politics and 2nd graders,  lie about the other side to make yourself look better.  thats just my 2 cents worth.


-------
Cool Hand Dave
 


Posts: 134 | Posted: 12:37 AM on November 20, 2002 | IP
fallingupwards84

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

that makes alot of sense. anyone who has bias towards a certain side of an issue is going to tend to exaggerate evidence that is just slightly related to the issue.


-------
i am a liberal chrisitian and proud of it!!!

"Those who produce should have, but we know that those who produce the most - that is, those who work hardest, and at the most difficult and most menial tasks, have the least." - Eugene Debs
 


Posts: 971 | Posted: 2:10 PM on November 20, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Ever seen the "man walking with dinosaur footprints"? Or the theory about how there should be more moon dust? There are plenty of Creationist theories that were proven wrong and hoaxes that are CURRENTLY being used by creationists as evidence for their side.

If anything, you have made an argument not only for evolution, but for all of science. You showed that it is constantly correcting itself and that it does not take proof based on authority. Thanks.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 01:51 AM on November 22, 2002 | IP
beavischrist

|       |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Evolutionist hoax? When revealed, everyone knows it was a hoax. It is stricken from science.

Creationist hoax? It never goes away. It remains an "arguement" for creation. Now and then creationists retract such hoaxes but they always live on in other textbooks, websites and pamphlets.
 


Posts: 193 | Posted: 9:35 PM on November 24, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

v
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 11:05 AM on January 28, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

v
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 11:05 AM on January 28, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hi, I'm an evolutionary ecologist from Australia, I can address these.

Everyone makes mistakes, even scientists but it's the rubric of the creationism to never correct them.

Nebraska man.(Hesperopithecus)

Firstly, the illustration was done for a popular magazine, the Illustrated London News, not for a scientific publication.

Secondly, scientists were skeptical even of the claim that the Hesperopithecus tooth belonged to a primate. It is simply not true that Nebraska Man was widely accepted as an ape-man, or even as an ape, by scientists, and its effect upon the scientific thinking of the time was negligible. For example, in his two-volume book Human Origins published during what was supposedly the heyday of Nebraska Man (1924), George MacCurdy dismissed Nebraska Man in a single footnote:

"In 1920 [sic], Osborn described two molars from the Pliocene of Nebraska; he attributed these to an anthropoid primate to which he has given the name Hesperopithecus. The teeth are not well preserved, so that the validity of Osborn's determination has not yet been generally accepted."


It would be impossible for me to address every creationist argument concerning Hesperopithecus, so if there is anything further, please post it.

Java man.

Ok, I'm presuming your working from Duane Gish's work here.

The human skulls that were found, came from a site 65 miles away in Wadjak, from cave deposits whilst Java Man can from river deposits in a flood plain. To say they were found nearby, is simply false.

Nor is it true, as is often claimed, that Dubois kept the existence of the Wadjak skulls secret because knowledge of them would have discredited Java Man. Dubois briefly reported the Wadjak skulls in three separate publications in 1890 and 1892.

Again, further porblems, please post it.

Piltdown man.(Eoanthropus dawsoni)

There's alot you can say about the Piltdown fraud. A number of scientists made foolish comments and the palaeontological community were horribly embarrissed. A number of scientists did believe that the cranium and jaw were not from the same creature, but no-one suspected a hoax. Piltdown's acceptance was probably helped by the fact that it conformed to contemporary beliefs about what a primitive human skull would look like. They were incorrect and although it persisted longer than it should have, the methods of science prvailed and the mistake was corrected. We're only human.

You can find a much much more indepth description of th hoax here.

http://home.tiac.net/~cri/piltdown/piltdown.html

Orce man. (VM-0)

Ok, it wasn't a skull, it's a partial skull fragment. It's simply cheap rhetoric to implying that scientists are so incompetent that they cannot tell the difference between a human and a donkey.

No-one has admitted it's from a donkey but fractal evidence may point to that. For now, it would seem safest to make no firm conclusions about the identity of VM-0 or the other possible hominid fossils from Orce.

Again, it's a complicated story and I can provide further information if you wish.

Peppered moths.

I'm presuming this comes from Jonathan Well's book, Icons of Evolution.

Peppered moths are an excelent example of natural selection.

But firstly, peppered moths do in fact rest on tree trunks a significant portion of the time although not the majority of the time, according to Majerus' data, who undertook the study.

Secondly, textbook photos are used to show relative crypsis of moth morphs, not to prove that peppered moths always rest in one section of the trees. And third, Majerus himself has taken unstaged photos of peppered moths on matching tree trunk backgrounds, and these are not significantly different than staged photos.

The peppered moths are used to show evidence of gene selection and selective predation, which they do very nicely.

Archaeoraptor.

National Geographic is not a scientific journal and they made the misake of publishing before the peer review process of respected scientific journals was implimented. That was National Geographics mistake, not the scientific community. What's interesting is that scientists picked the mistake, not journalists or creationists.

Hoaxes and mistakes don't happen in just evolutionary biology, but they happen throughout the entire scientific establishment but they get corrected. If you choose to reject science, hence the findings of scientists because they make mistakes then that's you problem but to exemplify perpetual dishonesty, that's creationism.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 12:18 PM on January 28, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Could this response please be copied to the new board?

http://www.youdebate.com/vBulletin/

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 2:33 PM on January 28, 2003 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.