The Hoax of the Missing Link

Piltdown Man

http://www.tiac.net/~cri_a/piltdown/piltdown.html

The remains of Piltdown Man was first acclaimed by anthropologists to be
about 5000,000 years old. Over 500 doctorial disertations were performed
on Piltdown Man. From 1912 until October of 1956 almost eneryone
believed Piltdown man was a missig link between ape and man. More
critical examination and investigation revealed that the jaw-bone belonged
to an ape that had died 50 years previously, yet it was dated to be about
500,000 years old. Can we really trust the scientist that are determined
to prove the theory of evolution? Were all the "experts" really fooled?
Piltdown Man was viewed in museums and studied in major textbooks for
several generations before it was declared a fraud. What will today's "fact"
of human evolution turn out to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

Originally posted by RJHinds
The remains of Piltdown Man was first acclaimed by anthropologists to be
about 5000,000 years old. Over 500 doctorial disertations were performed
on Piltdown Man. From 1912 until October of 1956 almost eneryone
believed Piltdown man was a missig link between ape and man. More
critical examination and investigation revealed that the jaw-bone belonged
t ...[text shortened]... y's "fact"
of human evolution turn out to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

The scientists got it wrong. They admitted it, learned from it, and moved on. When has a religion ever admitted it got something wrong? When has new evidence ever caused an old religious orthodoxy to be overturned?

Originally posted by rwingett
The scientists got it wrong. They admitted it, learned from it, and moved on. When has a religion ever admitted it got something wrong? When has new evidence ever caused an old religious orthodoxy to be overturned?

The evolutionary scientists also thought the Neanderthal Man was a
missing link at first too. So, what I am wondering is when are the
evolutionary scientist going to give up on the theory of evolution
and admit they got that wrong too.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The evolutionary scientists also thought the Neanderthal Man was a
missing link at first too. So, what I am wondering is when are the
evolutionary scientist going to give up on the theory of evolution
and admit they got that wrong too.

About the same time right winger's like you admit creationism is a fairy tale.

Thing is, they can change their stance, they will naturally do so most reluctantly but when the evidence tilts overwhelmingly in favor of something else, either the old combatants die or they give up and the young dudes with the new information wins out.

That can't happen with your religion, the story remains the same no matter what evidence it presented to you.

Of course you just become increasingly irrelevant in the modern world, there is no place for religious fairy tales.

Good luck tilting at windmills. If you know what I mean.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The evolutionary scientists also thought the Neanderthal Man was a
missing link at first too. So, what I am wondering is when are the
evolutionary scientist going to give up on the theory of evolution
and admit they got that wrong too.

There is no missing link and never will be so they'll never give up looking just like a dangling carrot in front of the horse. Lol.

Missing link between what and what?

Originally posted by sonhouse
About the same time right winger's like you admit creationism is a fairy tale.

Thing is, they can change their stance, they will naturally do so most reluctantly but when the evidence tilts overwhelmingly in favor of something else, either the old combatants die or they give up and the young dudes with the new information wins out.

That can't happen ...[text shortened]... place for religious fairy tales.

Good luck tilting at windmills. If you know what I mean.

What windmills? I don't see any windmills.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Missing link between what and what?

You don't read much do you? Try reading the second post.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You don't read much do you? Try reading the second post.

So you use a 100 year old hoax as proof evolution is also a hoax. Great argument there. You get more hilarious by the hour.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The remains of Piltdown Man was first acclaimed by anthropologists to be
about 5000,000 years old. Over 500 doctorial disertations were performed
on Piltdown Man. From 1912 until October of 1956 almost eneryone
believed Piltdown man was a missig link between ape and man. More
critical examination and investigation revealed that the jaw-bone belonged
t ...[text shortened]... y's "fact"
of human evolution turn out to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

There is of course a more positive reading of this story: science has the power to detect and repair its errors. Incorrect identification will be discovered. Anyway, who really cares about science before the fifties?

Originally posted by galveston75
There is no missing link and never will be so they'll never give up looking just like a dangling carrot in front of the horse. Lol.

The "missing link" is the transformation of ape into man ,(right?).
The religous people think they're onto something here because science has had problems explaining how ape turned into man (in such a short time). I think there was "oiutside" forces that sped up a "natural"" process.
I think E.T.'s were involved.

The E.T. explanation relates to spiritual/religous beliefs as well as scientific ones.
It bridges a gap for me, but leaves me with more questions than answers, admittandly.

Originally posted by Conrau K
There is of course a more positive reading of this story: science has the power to detect and repair its errors. Incorrect identification will be discovered. Anyway, who really cares about science before the fifties?

How about the Wright brothers , Thomas Edison, and Albert Einstein here
in the USA to name just a few?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
.... because science has had problems explaining how ape turned into man (in such a short time).

Science has had no such problems.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Science has had no such problems.

Ok. So "science" is totally agreed on the timeframe for the emergence of man? What was it again?