Why is evolution still relevant?

When answering the question in the said title, there are obviously many different parts to the one answer. But instead of answering the question directly, let me just state that the theory of evolution should be extinct. I'm talking about macro-evolution. First let me note that the Smithsonian is administered and funded by the United States government (and is located in Washington, D.C). This is important because its obvious to logical thinkers that our government is agenda-ridden, suppressive, and controlling to say the least. This correlation cannot be overlooked. The amount of misinformation and disinformation flowing out of government institutions is appalling and nothing less than a hindrance to a comfortable society and what should be basic knowledge of truths and human history.

Exhibit A: Nebraska man.
Nebraska man was recreated by the discovery of one (1) tooth. The portrayal of Nebraska man didn't stop there. A display of Nebraska man and his wife was created from this one (1) tooth as published in Illustrated London News in 1922. Later it was determined that the one (1) tooth was that from a pig. Nice start evolution!

Exhibit B: Piltdown man.
Piltdown man was named and recreated when a skull and jaw were "discovered" in England. Turned out that someone had filed down an ape's jaw to fit a human skull. But in its glory, the New York Times published a story in their paper titled "Darwin Theory is Proved True" on Sunday, December 22, 1912. Stay classy evolution!

Exhibit C: Lucy
Lucy is the evolutionists Ark of the Covenant, although she is very controversial to say the least. Although only 6 fragments of a skull were found, a full and detailed skull was constructed for her along with human hands and feet, even though NO bones of a hand or foot were ever discovered. The curator for the St. Louis Zoo, which has a Lucy exhibit, said their purpose of the display is not for education but for indoctrination in evolution theory. Professor David Menton from Washington University said, the statue is "a complete misrepresentation and I believe they know it is a misrepresentation." They like to stand by her "valgus knee" which they state means she normally walked upright, when what they evidently found was a tree hanging chimpanzee. They also say that due to her length ratio of humerus to femur, either her arms were beginning to shorten, her legs beginning to lengthen, or that both were occurring simultaneously. This is nothing more than filling the gaps to fit their theory. It's a Chimpanzee.
"Zoo officials have no plan to knuckle under. We cannot be updating every exhibit based on every new piece of evidence. We look at the overall exhibit and the impression it creates. We think the overall impression this exhibit creates is correct." --Bruce L. Carr - zoo's director of education. As seen in St. Louis Post Dispatch on July 22, 1996 page 1. What he is saying is that it's just fine to lie to kids and adults alike to give the impression that evolution is true. Their theory is more important than the facts. By the way, Lucy is still in textbooks. Evolution: Where imagination meets ignorance!

Exhibit D: Peking man.
Peking man was constructed from pieces of monkey skull found near primitive tools in the 1920s in Peking, China. They All evidence was lost in WWII. What wasn't told to the public is that at least 10 human skeletons were also found at the same site. This is nothing more than a group of people that dine on monkey brains. It still takes place today.

Exhibit E: Java man.
Java man (originally called Pithecanthropus erectus - meaning erect ape man and now called Homo erectus and dated by evolutionists at 500,000 years old) was made from a few scraps of bone found in 1891 in Java, Indonesia. Dutch anatomist Dr. Dubois believed in evolution and had gone to Java to look for missing links.


[edit on 14-5-2010 by six67seven]

Dubois had no formal training in geology or paleontology at the time, and his "archeological team" consisted of prison convicts with two army corporals as supervisors. What they found was an apes skull cap, 3 human teeth, and a human thigh bone and called it a missing link. Dubois was not even there when these were discovered and an ape's skull cap is not evidence of any missing link.
"Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether." - Henry Gee, Nature Vol. 412, July 12, 2001 page 131. Why would there be no evidence of chimpanzee evolution (our closest relative) but there is the idea of human evolution scattered throughout the world? Lucky us, we did it, we evolved!!! In your imagination!

Exhibit F: Orce man.
A skull fragment found in Spain and promoted as "the oldest example of man" in Eurasia was later identified as a four month old donkey skull fragment. A three day symposium to discuss the "Orce" man, named for the town in southern Spain, was canceled. "Ass taken for Man" --Daily Telegraph, May 14, 1984

Exhibit G: Human collarbone
A dolphins rib had been labeled "human collarbone" and promoted as evidence for evolution. Evolutionist Tim White exposed the hoax. I. Anderson, "Humanoid Collarbone Exposed as Dolphin's Rib," --New Scientist, April 28, 1983 page 199.

Exhibit H: You're Fired!
In the 1950's, Thomas E. Lee of the National Museum of Canada found advanced stone tools in glacial deposits at Sheguiandah on Manitoulin Island in Lake Huron. The deposits were 65,000 to 125,000 years old. The director of the museum was fired for refusing to fire the discoverer. Tons of artifacts disappeared into storage bins at the NMC. The discovery had to be killed, "It would have forced the rewriting of almost every book in the business." --The Hidden History of the Human Race. by Michael A. Cremo. page xviii

The only missing link for evolutionists is right between their ears.

Science learns from it's mistakes, and each one of those instances were proven to be fake... by science. Mistakes made in the past do not invalidate the entire field. The Theory of Evolution exists to explain the process of evolution. As we gain more knowledge as to how evolution works, the Theory grows. It's not something that's just done away with after a single incident.

People used to think the Earth was flat, so does that mean our current knowledge of Earth's shape is no longer relevant? No, it does not.

So I'm guessing you're a creationist and the fact that the complete skeletons of cromagnon man are just disinformation?

It's still relevant for the simple fact that there is less proof that we "popped" into being. Which in and of itself is a preposterous idea. I hope you aren't also one of those types who thinks the planet is only a few thousand years old as well...

Originally posted by KILL_DOGG
So I'm guessing you're a creationist and the fact that the complete skeletons of cromagnon man are just disinformation?

Cro Magnon man is a human... he is homo sapien sapien... which means wise wise man. They tricked you once they renamed homo sapien. THey want you to think we are evolving by now calling us the wise wise man, like we are getting better. WHAT A JOKE!!!

Humans have been on earth far far longer than what you believe

Great post s/f for you.

Originally posted by mf_luder
It's still relevant for the simple fact that there is less proof that we "popped" into being. Which in and of itself is a preposterous idea. I hope you aren't also one of those types who thinks the planet is only a few thousand years old as well...

If you think your great great great grandfather is a monkey, you have been duped. No where in history has a KIND of being EVER produced (given birth to) a DIFFERENT KIND. And you want to believe, we were born from a rock... the rock cooled.... it rained for millions of years.... primordial soup washed up on shore.... up sprung birds, insects, fish, mammals, and human beings which have unmeasurable minds and a spirit?? REALLY.....REALLY ??? Thats your prerogative but its on purpose that people are indoctrinated with believing we are just animals here for production and consumption.... its good business.

Originally posted by PieKeeper
Science learns from it's mistakes, and each one of those instances were proven to be fake... by science. Mistakes made in the past do not invalidate the entire field. The Theory of Evolution exists to explain the process of evolution. As we gain more knowledge as to how evolution works, the Theory grows. It's not something that's just done away with after a single incident.

People used to think the Earth was flat, so does that mean our current knowledge of Earth's shape is no longer relevant? No, it does not.

We keep correcting mistakes because we are human. Evolution is constantly changing because its constantly wrong or a hoax!!! I really don't care what you believe but I can point out how absolutely silly evolution has always been. People don't want someone telling them how to live, people want to see where they came from, people naturally lust after earthly possessions, people don't really know what the hell is going on, but they sure like to think they do.

Is it still relevant because the whole of biology is now understood in terms of evolution? All of the scientists doing science stuff accept evolution as fact. Only the uneducated and the willfully ignorant deny it.

Originally posted by godless
Is it still relevant because the whole of biology is now understood in terms of evolution? All of the scientists doing science stuff accept evolution as fact. Only the uneducated and the willfully ignorant deny it.

That is the dumbest and most unintelligent opinion I have heard in a long time. Youre lucky you got this much of a response from me.

reply to post by six67seven


Let me clarify... hopefully this is common sense. Just because a human skeleton is found and is determined to be 40,000 years old doesn't mean it is not human. It is total indoctrination if you believe that X-number of years old means non-human, ape, caveman, what not. This is related to cro magnon man (classification homo sapien sapien). It only takes a few minutes of research to find evidence of the Smithsonian cover-up of many discoveries that would change the way we view human history.

Originally posted by six67seven
reply to post by six67seven

 

Let me clarify... hopefully this is common sense. Just because a human skeleton is found and is determined to be 40,000 years old doesn't mean it is not human. It is total indoctrination if you believe that X-number of years old means non-human, ape, caveman, what not. This is related to cro magnon man (classification homo sapien sapien). It only takes a few minutes of research to find evidence of the Smithsonian cover-up of many discoveries that would change the way we view human history.

Evolution isn't reliant upon human history though. You can't deny the entire theory just because we don't know that much about ourselves.

Originally posted by six67seven

Originally posted by PieKeeper
Science learns from it's mistakes, and each one of those instances were proven to be fake... by science. Mistakes made in the past do not invalidate the entire field. The Theory of Evolution exists to explain the process of evolution. As we gain more knowledge as to how evolution works, the Theory grows. It's not something that's just done away with after a single incident.

People used to think the Earth was flat, so does that mean our current knowledge of Earth's shape is no longer relevant? No, it does not.

We keep correcting mistakes because we are human. Evolution is constantly changing because its constantly wrong or a hoax!!! I really don't care what you believe but I can point out how absolutely silly evolution has always been. People don't want someone telling them how to live, people want to see where they came from, people naturally lust after earthly possessions, people don't really know what the hell is going on, but they sure like to think they do.

You obviously have no understanding of the scientific definitions of Theory or Evolution.

A Theory, such as the Theory of Evolution, is a working (growing with new information) explanation of how and why a process happens. For there to be a Theory of something, that something has to be an observable phenomena. As new information on the phenomena is obtained, the understanding of it can be completely changed, and as a result grows. One of the great things about science is that it can correct previous errors and mistakes, and through the process of correction we learn even more.

Evolution, in the scientific use, is the change in the gene pool of a population. We know this happens. Right now Cheetahs are going through what is called a "Genetic Bottleneck", where a huge portion of a species suddenly dies, completely wiping out some traits, and altering the allele frequency in the gene pool of the population (allele frequency can be simply explained as the prevalence of a trait in the population). As a result of this bottleneck, there are quite a bit of male cheetahs with curly tails, much more than there were before the bottleneck. That is evolution: a change in the gene pool of a population.

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by six67seven
reply to post by six67seven

 

Let me clarify... hopefully this is common sense. Just because a human skeleton is found and is determined to be 40,000 years old doesn't mean it is not human. It is total indoctrination if you believe that X-number of years old means non-human, ape, caveman, what not. This is related to cro magnon man (classification homo sapien sapien). It only takes a few minutes of research to find evidence of the Smithsonian cover-up of many discoveries that would change the way we view human history.

Evolution isn't reliant upon human history though. You can't deny the entire theory just because we don't know that much about ourselves.

Evolution isn't reliant upon facts, thats why i deny it. Evolutionist archaeologists are nothing but subjective when digging. That have a picture of what they want to find, when they find bones, they fill the gaps. Science is suppose to be objective. You are supposed try to prove your theory wrong, not try to prove it factual.

Is the creationist theory relevant now, or ever has been. Go outside and combine a rib bone with some dirt. Report back once you manage to create a functioning human being.

Excellent Post, I don't get why People get so worked up about evolution.
Evolutionist make fun of creationist for being stupid. they look down upon Christians, because Evolutionist are, way too smart to be fooled by orginzed religion. while Atheism has more zelot's then Christianity could ever hope for. What's the Chip on these peoples shoulder, why do they care If people believe in a Creator? I never dump on Athiest, but I rarly get the same respect... to each thier own I guess.

. You are supposed try to prove your theory wrong, not try to prove it factual.

You can't prove a negative, that's why a proper Hypothesis is built around proving something rather than disproving it.

Interesting timing....

Yesterday in Scientific American online there was an article saying basically that ALL life on earth came from one original life form, one initial protein. The chance is only 1 in 1-with-2860-zeros behind it that we come from multiple beings.

That's 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
chance evolution is not true... bad odds.

and you thought 1 in a million was bad!

reply to post by six67seven


Nebraska man fooled no one in the scientific community. It did, however, fool one French artists who drew an artistic rendition of "Nebraska Man" and was reprimanded by the scientists who found the tooth. The scientific community soon debunked it. Nebraska man is actually a great example of how the peer review scientific process works. Creationists like to claim that Nebraska man fooled a lot of evolutionists - wrong.

Piltdown man is a mistake yes, but it was eventually found out as a forgery. Human beings are fallible, fallible enough to believe a magical sky daddy conjured people from dirt during a very busy week.

You know what, I'm gonna stop here. Most of the cases you are presenting are the same old Creationist tripe and all hoaxes have been found out and proven wrong by the scientific community (even the myriad of Creationist hoaxes).

Science is based on evidence, yes every so often there are hoaxers that come around but legitimate science is always there to peer review and fact check claims and finds. Creationism on the other hand has no checks and balances, it is a system based on bias toward a particular conclusion and any evidence to the contrary is throw out. Any tiny little mystery left in evolution, any mistake by any scientists who ever studied evolution, is used by Creationists as though if evolution loses one piece of evidence it suddenly falls apart

The evolutionary theory is currently better proven and better understood than the theory of gravity. So why is it relevant? Because the fossil record, genetics, behavioral studies and phylogeny continuously put it to the test AND it stands up to those tests better than Darwin could have ever even fantasized in his wildest dream it would. When something has that much evidence and some comes along saying "Nuh uh, God did it" there really isn't a reason to go "Maybe the creationist has a point"

Here's a tip, start doing your research in sources that have an obligation to fairness and evidence not to bronze age myths and blind faith.




[edit on 14-5-2010 by Titen-Sxull]