| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
22 Dec 2007 03:20:48 PM |
| Object: |
Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks. Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook. That means that my claim that Piltdown Man appeared in at
least a million of textbooks is correct.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/e1b3691197cd8414/8272877b45ca5871?lnk=st&q=#8272877b45ca5871
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/f0804dc833c6789d/01f2259d7c251e59?lnk=st&q=textbook+%22piltdown+man%22+author%3Amccoy%40sunset.net#01f2259d7c251e59
The thing is Bobbie, Dana Tweedy, et al., thinks that I man done with
Piltdown Man. Actually this is not the case. I already stated that I
have some unpublished citations that contain Piltdown Man.
JM
.
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 01:17:40 PM |
|
|
<mccoy@sunset.net> wrote in message
news:131c9587-f2dc-480e-8512-e76bc9bbba9d@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks. Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook. That means that my claim that Piltdown Man appeared in at
least a million of textbooks is correct.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/e1b3691197cd8414/8272877b45ca5871?lnk=st&q=#8272877b45ca5871
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/f0804dc833c6789d/01f2259d7c251e59?lnk=st&q=textbook+%22piltdown+man%22+author%3Amccoy%40sunset.net#01f2259d7c251e59
The thing is Bobbie, Dana Tweedy, et al., thinks that I man done with
Piltdown Man. Actually this is not the case. I already stated that I
have some unpublished citations that contain Piltdown Man.
JM
Yes and many thousands of myths and fables have appeared in millions of
Bibles!
The Piltdown Man fraud has been published by thousands of scientists.
Religious frauds continue to claim the fraudulent bibles are still the word
of
an imaginary God!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 03:32:02 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Pity that many do not understand this...
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 03:47:03 PM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 1:32=A0pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. =A0
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. =A0You see, science
CAN make mistakes. =A0That's its strength. =A0Science is not allowed to be=
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
In regard to Buikika666's statement:
"Look what you've been reduced to! Flogging a dead hoax because you
have quite literally nothing in the way of science to offer. How
pathetic is *that*?"
Actually this is not the case. I am not beating a dead horse, but
rather Bobbie, "Ye Old One" was beating a dead horse with his Piltdown
Death March. I merely responded because he wanted me to.
JM
Pity that many do not understand this...
--
****************************************************
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting =A0*
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of =A0 *
* separation between church and state." =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --Thomas Jefferson, 1802=
*
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 03:54:41 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. May I see it?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 04:01:10 PM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 1:54=A0pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. =A0
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. =A0You see, scienc=
e
CAN make mistakes. =A0That's its strength. =A0Science is not allowed to=
be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the=
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory i=
s
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. =A0 When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. =A0 You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Ya, I hope you do see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. =A0May I see it?
Trusts me O' DanielSan, if you think that you can see any specimen
make arrangements to see them and tell us how you do. And by the way,
make sure that you aren't look at a cast, because sometimes that's
what they will show you. And you will not know this because ye cannot
touche.
JM
--
****************************************************
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting =A0*
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of =A0 *
* separation between church and state." =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --Thomas Jefferson, 1802=
*
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 04:05:37 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Ya, I hope you do see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. May I see it?
Trusts me O' DanielSan, if you think that you can see any specimen
make arrangements to see them and tell us how you do. And by the way,
make sure that you aren't look at a cast, because sometimes that's
what they will show you. And you will not know this because ye cannot
touche.
In other words, you have no evidence to back up your assertion.
Have a nice day!
As for me, I'm going to go out and do some Christmas shopping. Will
post again when I get back. :-)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 04:08:32 PM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 2:05=A0pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. =A0
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. =A0You see, scie=
nce
CAN make mistakes. =A0That's its strength. =A0Science is not allowed =
to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is t=
he
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory=
is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. =A0 When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. =A0 You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Ya, I hope you do see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed=
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. =A0May I see it?
Trusts me O' DanielSan, if you think that you can see any specimen
make arrangements to see them and tell us how you do. And by the way,
make sure that you aren't look at a cast, because sometimes that's
what they will show you. And you will not know this because ye cannot
touche.
In other words, you have no evidence to back up your assertion.
Danielsan, what you are asking me to do is visit the local college
library to substantiate with quotation. This is the holiday season
O'Daniel San. I recall reading an evolutionist account in which the
claim was made that he could not see any specimens and that the museum
could say yes, you may see the specimenm, and when you show up you are
told, oh, the specimen is out for cleaning or some other excuse. It
was either Johanson or one of his opposition evolutionist writers that
wrote this.
Have a nice day!!!
JM
Have a nice day!
As for me, I'm going to go out and do some Christmas shopping. =A0Will
post again when I get back. =A0:-)
--
****************************************************
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting =A0*
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of =A0 *
* separation between church and state." =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*
* =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --Thomas Jefferson, 1802=
*
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:23:38 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:08:32 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 2:05 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Ya, I hope you do see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. May I see it?
Trusts me O' DanielSan, if you think that you can see any specimen
make arrangements to see them and tell us how you do. And by the way,
make sure that you aren't look at a cast, because sometimes that's
what they will show you. And you will not know this because ye cannot
touche.
In other words, you have no evidence to back up your assertion.
Danielsan, what you are asking me to do is visit the local college
library to substantiate with quotation.
You need to provide evidence McClueless. You never do.
This is the holiday season
O'Daniel San. I recall reading an evolutionist account in which the
claim was made that he could not see any specimens and that the museum
could say yes, you may see the specimenm, and when you show up you are
told, oh, the specimen is out for cleaning or some other excuse. It
was either Johanson or one of his opposition evolutionist writers that
wrote this.
Was it McClueless, or was it just you vivid imagination?
Have a nice day!!!
JM
[excessive sig removed and reported as abuse.]
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: McCoy Proves Again That he's Got nothing to Offer but LIES |
24 Dec 2007 10:00:48 AM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 4:01 pm, wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them.
I've personally seen them. Actual fossils, not casts. I've
personally pulled fossils out of rocks, you childishly transparent
LIAR.
You've been laughed out of t.o. because of your profound and
irremediable vacuity. Do you serious think atheists will let you get
away with your ***** any more than the t.o. regulars will?
And what would you do even if you were presented with all these
fossils you LIE don't exist? Nothing - that's what. You're not
remotely qualified to even understand them. You'd deny them all and
continue to LIE about it because THAT'S ALL YOU CAN DO.
The Theory of Evolution is the only science-based theory explaining
the distribution, diversity an history of life on Earth.
Do ID creationists have any science at all to support their position?
NO!
Do ID creationists have any science at all to overturn the Theory of
Evolution? NO!
That's why you're reduced to whining endlessly about evolution.
Now either put up **YOUR** scientific evidence right here, right now,
or ***** off.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:21:24 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:01:10 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
Ah, I see.
Ya, I hope you do see.
Your evidence that the majority of the scientific world is not "allowed
to see them" is, I'm sure, astounding. May I see it?
Trusts me O' DanielSan, if you think that you can see any specimen
make arrangements to see them and tell us how you do. And by the way,
make sure that you aren't look at a cast, because sometimes that's
what they will show you. And you will not know this because ye cannot
touche.
JM
If you are a scientist, and make a case for seeing a specimen, then
you will get to see it. It was the breach of just that protocol that
cast a lot of doubt on the PDM fossil.
Of course, not being scientifically literate you would not understand
such methods.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 07:18:41 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:47:03 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:32 pm, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
mc...@sunset.net wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
"Fraud" in science does not dilute science. In fact, when a fraud is
revealed, it actually shows the strength of science. You see, science
CAN make mistakes. That's its strength. Science is not allowed to be
perfect or else it's not science because science, BY DEFINITION, is the
refinement of hypotheses by testing and observation.
If Piltdown Man, for example, is revealed as a fraud, then the theory is
refined, not diluted.
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It
merely shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
Fact is all the other supposed fossil proofs are taken by faith.
Nobody has seen them, nobody can see them, and nobody is allowed to
see them. When I say nobody I don't mean the scientists who have
them locked up in their vaults, but the majority of the scientific
world. There are many analogies that could be made in reference to
Piltdown Man and the other fossils. You can see the scientific
descriptions, the cover-ups, the "hopes" exposed, the capitulations,
the published textbooks, etc.
In regard to Buikika666's statement:
"Look what you've been reduced to! Flogging a dead hoax because you
have quite literally nothing in the way of science to offer. How
pathetic is *that*?"
Actually this is not the case. I am not beating a dead horse, but
rather Bobbie, "Ye Old One" was beating a dead horse with his Piltdown
Death March. I merely responded because he wanted me to.
JM
Your McPiltdown Death March has become a legend it its own lifetime -
which now stands at 18 months and counting.
[excessive sig removed and reported as abuse.]
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 07:17:39 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:47:03 -0800, mccoy wrote:
Nobody claimed that Piltdown man exposed evolution as a fraud. It merely
shows that there is faith exercised in the fossil 'evidence.'
You lie.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus loves you all, and can't wait to control you like a
small household pet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: McCoy Still a Pathetic Little Chicken ***** |
22 Dec 2007 03:28:12 PM |
|
|
Look what you've been reduced to! Flogging a dead hoax because you
have quite literally nothing in the way of science to offer. How
pathetic is *that*?
Bring your positive science supporting creation right here to this
thread. Let's you and me formally debate it. I made this offer
before and you accepted and THEN YOU RAN AWAY. Why is that?
Do you have the science and the guts to face me this time - or are you
going to run again?
Because when you get right down to that bottom line, wild claims,
ancient hoaxes, popular books, web sites and news groups have nothing
whatsoever to do with it. The only thing of value is what your
science can support.
Now do you have it or don't you? Let's see it.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 03:39:34 PM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks.
It didn't fool them for very long after they were finally allowed to
study it. The scientists being allowed to get their hands on it,
THAT's what took a long time.
And who was it that discovered that piltdown was a hoax? That's right.
Scientists.
Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook.
Don't blame the scientists for that, blame the textbook publishers. We
still have crap textbooks today with outdated and inaccurate
information.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Savageduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 04:28:38 PM |
|
|
On 2007-12-22 13:39:34 -0800, Conspiracy of Doves <mark_dp73@yahoo.com> said:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks.
It didn't fool them for very long after they were finally allowed to
study it. The scientists being allowed to get their hands on it,
THAT's what took a long time.
And who was it that discovered that piltdown was a hoax? That's right.
Scientists.
Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook.
Don't blame the scientists for that, blame the textbook publishers. We
still have crap textbooks today with outdated and inaccurate
information.
The real crime of this hoax, as one theory goes, was allegedly
perpetrated by Arthur Conan-Doyle on Charles Dawson (or perhaps created
by Dawson himself) and Sir Arthur Keith, both of whom he loathed, was
the distaction this created, discounting the great Southern African
discoveries.
Raymond Dart's discovery of Austropithecus africanus at Taung in 1924
was discounted by Keith as nothing but a juvenile gorilla because he
had been taken in completely by Piltdown.
This was European arrogence of the highest order; after all "Modern man
had to be European and his origins had to be British, not some
primitive African homonid."
Only in 1947 did Keith apologise to Dart and state, "Dart was right and
I was wrong."
Robert Ardry's three wild men of Africa, Raymond Dart, Robert Broom and
Louis Leaky had to wait for the Piltdown Hoax to be discredited before
they received the recognition they deserved.
I am proud to say i met Dart and Phillip Tobias in 1970 and had an
opportunity to hold the Taung brain cast. Tobias has his part in the
Homonid story by conducting the anatomical analysis of the Mary Leaky
fossils. It was he who was able to confirm Leaky's Paranthropus and
Zinjanthropus were closely related to the Dart/Broom Austropithecene,
Australopithecus robustus.
The damage done still lingers.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 04:12:33 PM |
|
|
On Dec 22, 1:39=A0pm, Conspiracy of Doves <mark_d...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
But Sir Arthur Keith was an anatomist, and through his influence
Piltdown Man was promoted by others.
It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks.
It didn't fool them for very long
40 years. They could have seen the obvious chisel marks on the
teeth.
after they were finally allowed to
study it. The scientists being allowed to get their hands on it,
THAT's what took a long time.
And who was it that discovered that piltdown was a hoax? That's right.
Scientists.
Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook.
Don't blame the scientists for that, blame the textbook publishers. We
still have crap textbooks today with outdated and inaccurate
information.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:31:29 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:12:33 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:39 pm, Conspiracy of Doves <mark_d...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
But Sir Arthur Keith was an anatomist, and through his influence
Piltdown Man was promoted by others.
By a few, not by the many.
It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks.
It didn't fool them for very long
40 years. They could have seen the obvious chisel marks on the
teeth.
40 years which included TWO long running world wars and the biggest
economic depression we have ever seen.
Grow up McClueless, you have been thrashed over this so many times in
the past so it is time you stopped spouting your lies.
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:28:47 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:39:34 -0800 (PST), Conspiracy of Doves
<mark_dp73@yahoo.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
I would say that Dawson was, by the standards of the time, considered
a scientist.
[snip]
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:50:36 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:28:47 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:39:34 -0800 (PST), Conspiracy of Doves
<mark_dp73@yahoo.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
I would say that Dawson was, by the standards of the time, considered
a scientist.
Weeeellll.... he had a history of fakery.
[snip]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 10:33:11 AM |
|
|
On Dec 23, 7:50 am, Christopher A.Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:28:47 GMT, Ye Old One <use...@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:39:34 -0800 (PST), Conspiracy of Doves
<mark_d...@yahoo.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
I would say that Dawson was, by the standards of the time, considered
a scientist.
Weeeellll.... he had a history of fakery.
What, you mean from his being a lawyer?
*rimshot*
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 11:43:10 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 07:50:36 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:28:47 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:39:34 -0800 (PST), Conspiracy of Doves
<mark_dp73@yahoo.com> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
The person who 'discovered' piltdown wasn't a scientist. He was a
lawyer and an amateur archeologist.
I would say that Dawson was, by the standards of the time, considered
a scientist.
Weeeellll.... he had a history of fakery.
True, but by the common definition of a scientist at that time....
Still, it is long over - I wish the same could be said for the
stupidity that McClueless exhibits.
[snip]
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ye Old One" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 07:13:23 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:20:48 -0800 (PST), enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
One exposed by science.
It fooled a
lot of scientists,
No, it fooled a few scientists.
and even made it into the textbooks.
But not into MILLIONS of school textbooks McClueless.
Even after
Piltdown was exposed it continued to be published in at least one more
textbook.
Did it McClueless?
That means that my claim that Piltdown Man appeared in at
least a million of textbooks is correct.
You claim was that it appeared in millions, so you were told to prove
that exaggerated claim.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/e1b3691197cd8414/8272877b45ca5871?lnk=st&q=#8272877b45ca5871
Why post a thread that puts you in such a bad light McClueless?
Stupidity?
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/f0804dc833c6789d/01f2259d7c251e59?lnk=st&q=textbook+%22piltdown+man%22+author%3Amccoy%40sunset.net#01f2259d7c251e59
The thing is Bobbie, Dana Tweedy, et al., thinks that I man done with
Piltdown Man. Actually this is not the case. I already stated that I
have some unpublished citations that contain Piltdown Man.
What you state and what is reality are usually two very different
things.
JM
--
Bob.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 09:07:03 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:20:48 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages. It fooled a
lot of scientists, and even made it into the textbooks.
Ha ha ha
Yet your bible gets decimated by physical law and you ignore it.
At least science is self correcting.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
22 Dec 2007 07:17:14 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:20:48 -0800, mccoy wrote:
Piltdown Man was an evolutionist's fraudie of the ages.
But nothing on the scale of that "bible" thing. It's fooled people for
thousands of years now...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"For god so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son,
that whosoever would believe in him would believe in anything."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Bobbies Piltdown Challenge |
23 Dec 2007 06:17:23 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:20:48 -0800, mccoy wrote:
The thing is Bobbie, Dana Tweedy, et al., thinks that I man done with
Piltdown Man.
Actually, everybody thinks you're done with sanity...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
At a recent PTL convention, the hotel reported that over 80%
of the conventionites watched at least one x-rated movie on
the hotel's ppv cable...
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
