Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
8 bytes removed ,  04:57, October 7, 2009
m
remove liberal nitpicking
Line 5: Line 5:  
[[Image:piltdownman_quennell_1922.png|thumb|right|200px|A rendering of "Piltdown Man", according to evolutionists in 1922.]]
 
[[Image:piltdownman_quennell_1922.png|thumb|right|200px|A rendering of "Piltdown Man", according to evolutionists in 1922.]]
   −
Creationists believe that the Piltdown man was not an isolated incident of bad judgment by evolutionists and that the examples of the [[Nebraska Man]], [[Java Man]], [[Ocre Man]], [[Neanderthal]]s, and [[Flores Man]] can be cited. <ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html "Evolution Fraud"], Northwest Creation Network</ref> However, many evolutionists were more than happy to see Piltdown man leave the pantheon of evolutionary ancestors, as they viewed it as an anomaly which did not fit in with the rest of their research.{{fact}}
+
Creationists believe that the Piltdown man was not an isolated incident of bad judgment by evolutionists and that the examples of the [[Nebraska Man]], [[Java Man]], [[Ocre Man]], [[Neanderthal]]s, and [[Flores Man]] can be cited. <ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html "Evolution Fraud"], Northwest Creation Network</ref> However, many evolutionists were more than happy to see Piltdown man leave the pantheon of evolutionary ancestors, as they viewed it as an anomaly which did not fit in with the rest of their research.
    
The date assigned to the bones was never based on the bones at all, but rather were based on testing of older material found nearby. This is partially due to the fact that modern dating techniques, like the [[Fluorine Absorption test]], were not yet invented (and indeed, when they were, proved essential to Piltdown man's downfall<ref>[http://www.palarch.nl/NorthWestEurope/nweur_2006_1_1.pdf Annotated Biblography of the Piltdown Man Forgery]</ref>).  Like similar artifacts purporting to prove evolution today, there was no independent or public scrutiny of the actual materials.
 
The date assigned to the bones was never based on the bones at all, but rather were based on testing of older material found nearby. This is partially due to the fact that modern dating techniques, like the [[Fluorine Absorption test]], were not yet invented (and indeed, when they were, proved essential to Piltdown man's downfall<ref>[http://www.palarch.nl/NorthWestEurope/nweur_2006_1_1.pdf Annotated Biblography of the Piltdown Man Forgery]</ref>).  Like similar artifacts purporting to prove evolution today, there was no independent or public scrutiny of the actual materials.
Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, oversight, Administrators
2,260

edits

Navigation menu