Originally posted by Zahlanzi
who would put those bones together to deceive anthropologists and why in the world would they do that?
as you are aware my friend, the number of bones supporting a 'link', from apes to humans could fit on a medium sized coffee table, surprise surprise given the eighty or so thousand? million? squillion? of years this transition would have taken one would think that there would have been a plethora of evidence. You see what happens when your Catholicism supports a hypothesis directly opposed to the revealed word of God, a dilemma indeed!
New Scientist commented: “Judged by the amount of evidence upon which it is based, the study of fossil man hardly deserves to be more than a sub-discipline of palaeontology or anthropology. . . . the collection is so tantalisingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often so fragmentary and inconclusive.”1
“The primary scientific evidence is a pitifully small array of bones from which to construct man’s evolutionary history. One anthropologist has compared the task to that of reconstructing the plot of War and Peace with 13 randomly selected pages.”2
1.New Scientist, “Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?” by John Reader, March 26, 1981, p. 802.
2.Science, “The Politics of Paleoanthropology,” by Constance Holden, August 14, 1981, p. 737