February 21, 2005
ONE FRAUD ON TOP OF ANOTHER (via Brian Boys)
History of modern man unravels as German scholar is exposed as fraud: Flamboyant anthropologist falsified dating of key discoveries (Luke Harding, February 19, 2005, The Guardian)
It appeared to be one of archaeology's most sensational finds. The skull fragment discovered in a peat bog near Hamburg was more than 36,000 years old - and was the vital missing link between modern humans and Neanderthals.This, at least, is what Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten - a distinguished, cigar-smoking German anthropologist - told his scientific colleagues, to global acclaim, after being invited to date the extremely rare skull.
However, the professor's 30-year-old academic career has now ended in disgrace after the revelation that he systematically falsified the dates on this and numerous other "stone age" relics.
Yesterday his university in Frankfurt announced the professor had been forced to retire because of numerous "falsehoods and manipulations". According to experts, his deceptions may mean an entire tranche of the history of man's development will have to be rewritten. [...]
Missing links and planted stone age finds
Piltdown Man
The most infamous of all scientific frauds was unearthed in 1912 in a Sussex gravel pit. With its huge human-like braincase and ape-like jaw, the Piltdown Man "fossil" was named Eoanthropus dawsoni after Charles Dawson, the solicitor and amateur archaeologist who discovered it. For 40 years Piltdown Man was heralded as the missing link between humans and their primate ancestors. But in 1953 scientists concluded it was a forgery. Radiocarbon dating showed the human skull was just 600 years old, while the jawbone was that of an orang-utan. The entire package of fossil fragments found at Piltdown - which included a prehistoric cricket bat - had been planted.The devil's archaeologist
Japanese archaeologist Shinichi Fujimura was so prolific at uncovering prehistoric artefacts he earned the nickname "God's hands". At site after site, Fujimura discovered stoneware and relics that pushed back the limits of Japan's known history. The researcher and his stone age finds drew international attention and rewrote text books. In November 2000 the spell was broken when a newspaper printed pictures of Fujimura digging holes and burying objects that he later dug up and announced as major finds. "I was tempted by the devil. I don't know how I can apologise for what I did," he said.Piltdown Turkey
The supposed fossil of Archaeoraptor, which was to become known as the "Piltdown turkey", came to light in 1999 when National Geographic magazine published an account of its discovery. It seemed to show another missing link - this time between birds and dinosaurs. Archaeoraptor appeared to be the remains of a large feathered bird with the tail of a dinosaur. The fossil was smuggled out of China and sold to a private collector in the US for £51,000. Experts were suspicious and closer examination showed the specimen to be a "composite" - two fossils stuck together with strong glue.
David Adam
Add Darwin's finches, Haeckel's embryoes, Kettlewell's peppered moths and you end up with an unfortunately fair joke:
Q: How do you know when a Darwinist is lying?
A: He says he has evidence of speciation.
Posted by Orrin Judd at February 21, 2005 12:00 AMI bet the real reason Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten was fired was because he refused to give up his cigar smoking.
Posted by: Randall Voth at February 21, 2005 07:25 AMOrrin, sometimes you are too funny.
It wasn't ID or plain creationists that figured out that these frauds were frauds. It was the ordinary course of scientific inquiry.
Curiously enough, you are the only antidarwinian I know of who thinks that no amount of evidence could disprove darwinism. That's why the other creationists were so desperate to believe the Paluxy River hoax.
If that one had been valid, then darwinism would have fallen in a day.
Even more curiously, if Paluxy COULD have been valid, then evidence overthrowing darwinism ought to be under our feet everywhere.
Eppur se muove.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at February 21, 2005 05:26 PMHarry:
When you have more than hoaxes we'll be glad to listen.
Posted by: oj at February 21, 2005 05:33 PM"When you have more than hoaxes we'll be glad to listen."
Color me sceptical on that one.
As for Darwin's finches, AFAICT they are evidence of natural selection, but not necessarily speciation.
Posted by: creeper at February 22, 2005 04:04 AMcreeper:
Evidence of the inability of Natural Selection to cause speciation and of the Darwinist to see it where it doesn't exist. The observation from which Darwinism proceeded is false. Open-minded men would be troubled by that.
Posted by: oj at February 22, 2005 08:09 AMOJ definitely the one that the Intelligent Designer f----- up on. And I though only Islamists were dumb pricks. Next OJ will be telling us HE made the earth in 6 days and on the seveth him OJ. I'm glad for his kids sake that intellegence is usually inherited on the mothers side.
Dave
Posted by: Dave Kabay at February 22, 2005 08:51 AMWhat Darwin's finches showed were that Natural Selection is capable of altering the morphology of an organism over time as Darwin described, due to the facts that the finches had variable traits, that they were capable of passing those on to their offspring, and that they were in an environment that favored certain characteristics. In short, it showed that Natural Selection works, regardless of whether the variation seen here rose to the level of a species.
Speciation is important to the overall modern theory of evolution, not to natural selection itself, which is only a subset of the theory.
It is possible that not all of Darwin's finch 'species' were species, since a few (not all) have been shown to be capable of interbreeding. This does not mean that none of them were different species, and it does not mean that the variation that did occur is insignificant as regards the principle of natural selection.
"Evidence of the inability of Natural Selection to cause speciation"
Lack of evidence of ability does not equal evidence of inability. Surely someone who has followed the news regarding Iraq/Saddam/WMD (such as yourself) is aware of that.
Posted by: creeper at February 22, 2005 09:02 AMAn excellent analogy. The desire of policymakers to attack Saddam led them to see WMD where there was none. The desire of Darwinists to attack Creation leads them to see Natural Selection where there is none. Darwinism is psychology, not science.
Posted by: oj at February 22, 2005 09:08 AMSpin it whichever way you wish, Orrin; logically lack of evidence of ability does not equal evidence of inability, so don't go pretending that it is.
Posted by: creeper at February 22, 2005 09:31 AM