If anyone remembers the case of the Piltdown Man, and how the entire lower mandible was actually the jaw of an orang-utan, they'd think twice about the credibility of Darwin.
13 comments
And yet the pieces of the cross or the ark that have been marketed for decades have no undermining of Christian Truthology.
Scientists disproved Piltdown man, science hides no facts
Oh yes, we remember Piltdown Man. It stands as an excellent example of how science is a self-correcting process. Science proved that Piltdown Man was a hoax, which is why no one cites it as evidence anymore.
Science also explained that the Paluxy tracks did not prove that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. However, some creationists still cite the tracks as support for their ideas. That is because creationism is NOT self correcting because it is not grounded in science.
See the difference?
I remember that creationists were just as upset about Pilty as they were about any other fossil. They never looked closely enough to detect the fraud.
This reminds me of all the false creationist hoaxes, of pseudoarchaeology, pseudoscientific creationist arguments, straw men of science, misrepresentations, etc. Just to mention a few classics: "random chance", "the cell is too complex", "even Darwin said that the eye could not have evolved", "science's Darwin prophet", "mix chemicals in a bowl and a human won't come out", "evolution means atheism", "science means Marxism", "evolution caused Hitler" (biology and Social Darwinism confusion), ...
And obviously, how was the hoax discovered to be a hoax? Basic science.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
