The Evolution Chamber: Piltdown Man

[Earthling]

I love the old creationist standards - its almost like a soccer fans' chant - "Piltdown man, Piltdown man, Piltdown man......Piltdown man, Piltdown man, Piltdown maa-an..." - to the tune of stars and stripes forever...

Difficult to bear, isn't it?

 

[Earthling]

Ah yes! Because self-induced ignorance is apparently bliss for some people. How sad.

Like I told the other guy, you aren't going to read the Aid To Understanding The Bible, either, and it doesn't even make the claim of truth. You guys can really be as obtuse as you are arrogant. I suppose the same applies to me as well.

 

[Earthling]

Isn't the scientific method wonderful! It's a self-correcting method that changes it's conclusions based on new evidence and the review of old evidence. It's been BY FAR the best method humans have discovered for determining the reality of the physical universe.

Sadly, if Piltdown Man had been part of some theist's ancient religious texts, then they would undoubtedly be making up all sorts of delusional excuses for why it's actually true.

Well, I wouldn't. I would be out there promoting awareness of it like I do with failures and frauds in my beliefs, like here in these forums I have with spurious scriptures, The Jehovah's Witnesses, and the fallibility of the Bible, not to mention Inquisition, and pagan influence. You've got to keep it honest if you want to keep it true.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I hope no one is suggesting that we scrap the study of the development of man simply because someone hoaxed a discovery over 100 years ago.

I think it is the hope of creationists.

What they do not seem to understand is that by the same "logic" Christianity had been refuted.

 

[David1967]

I think it is the hope of creationists.

What they do not seem to understand is that by the same "logic" Christianity had been refuted.

I think (IMHO that is), is it is a mistake to try and use science and holy books interchangeably. As a natural science professor (who is also a Christian BTW) once said to me on a fossil dig, "The bible is not a book on Paleontology. I think we should leave it at that and realize that both spirituality and science are relevant but very different studies. Cant use one to validate the other. IMO of course.

 

[Audie]

Then anyone can safely say you haven’t considered all the evidence

As noted elsewhere, it is odd how seldom our
(nominal) Christians seem concerned with
accuracy or simple truthfulness.

 

[Audie]

I think it is the hope of creationists.

Clutching at straws.

 

[Earthling]

I think it is the hope of creationists.

What they do not seem to understand is that by the same "logic" Christianity had been refuted.

No, what you don't understand is that Piltdown Man as discussed in this thread is only a demonstration of how emotionally fixated you are to your beliefs. The title of the thread could be "My God Is Bigger Than Your God." It's pointless. Even the ignorant Christians know this, that's why religious forums primarily consist of disgruntled science minded skeptics who could be spending their time doing science instead of arguing with mythologists.

 

[Earthling]

As noted elsewhere, it is odd how seldom our
(nominal) Christians seem concerned with
accuracy or simple truthfulness.

Replace the word Christian with human in your statement for more accuracy and simple truthfulness.

 

[Earthling]

I hope no one is suggesting that we scrap the study of the development of man simply because someone hoaxed a discovery over 100 years ago.

Not at all.

 

[Earthling]

Really? Links please. You do realize that when it comes to such claims that you have shown yourself to be less than reliable.

Links?! You want links of the prominence of Piltdown Man in the first half of the 20th century? Well go find them, and if you do so what?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, what you don't understand is that Piltdown Man as discussed in this thread is only a demonstration of how emotionally fixated you are to your beliefs. The title of the thread could be "My God Is Bigger Than Your God." It's pointless. Even the ignorant Christians know this, that's why religious forums primarily consist of disgruntled science minded skeptics who could be spending their time doing science instead of arguing with mythologists.

All you have been able to do is to make bogus easily refuted claims.. What good does this do for your myth?

And religious beliefs are your flaws, not ours..

 

[Subduction Zone]

Links?! You want links of the prominence of Piltdown Man in the first half of the 20th century? Well go find them, and if you do so what?

Then you gain at least some credibility here. Right now your claims can be dismissed with the wave of a hand.

 

[Altfish]

Well, I wouldn't. I would be out there promoting awareness of it like I do with failures and frauds in my beliefs, like here in these forums I have with spurious scriptures, The Jehovah's Witnesses, and the fallibility of the Bible, not to mention Inquisition, and pagan influence. You've got to keep it honest if you want to keep it true.

The difference is that scientists accept this was a fraud, it was scientists who discovered it was a fraud, it was scientists who banished it from their books - apart from a side line of "This is what can go wrong if you don't check facts"

If only creationists had the same rigorous standard and ethics. Instead it is lying for Jesus, double downing for Jesus. And they still claim the moral high ground.

So sad. Is it any wonder religion is failing.

 

[jonathan180iq]

From 1912 to 1953 Piltdown man was accepted as genuine by the evolution community.

Citation, please.

After 40 years of prestige in the halls of peer reviewed reproducible observation...

Citations, please.

The text book that depicted Piltdown Man as a human ancestor...

Citation, please.

My take on Darwin, other than that he was nuts, is that at that time they were so prudish that they thought that the legs of a piano should be covered with pants, and simultaneously, travel was beginning to make it easier for chimps and exotic animals to be put on exhibit. They used to dress the chimps in human clothing to cover their nakedness. It didn't take much of a leap of Darwin's insane imagination to come up with Origins under those circumstances.

Citation, please.

Museums worldwide prominently featured copies and photographs of the skull, while books and periodicals quickly spread the news.

Citations, please.

 

[David1967]

OK. Here,s a link that should be helpful....maybe.

Piltdown Man - Wikipedia

 

[SkepticThinker]

Difficult to bear, isn't it?

It's bizarre, actually.

 

[David1967]

From the Wikipedia article;

As early as 1913, David Waterston of King's College London published in Nature his conclusion that the sample consisted of an ape mandible and human skull.[7] Likewise, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule concluded the same thing in 1915. A third opinion from the American zoologist Gerrit Smith Miller concluded that Piltdown's jaw came from a fossil ape. In 1923, Franz Weidenreich examined the remains and correctly reported that they consisted of a modern human cranium and an orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth.[8]

 

[sayak83]

What is your opinion of the ancient Greek philosophers who expounded upon Evolution?

My take on Darwin, other than that he was nuts, is that at that time they were so prudish that they thought that the legs of a piano should be covered with pants, and simultaneously, travel was beginning to make it easier for chimps and exotic animals to be put on exhibit. They used to dress the chimps in human clothing to cover their nakedness. It didn't take much of a leap of Darwin's insane imagination to come up with Origins under those circumstances.

I mean, once he failed at Religion.

You are deluded beyond belief.

 

[Revoltingest]

You are deluded beyond belief.

Of course, this isn't something we should be telling each other.