/* */

PDA

View Full Version : A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propaganda



Dr.Trax
02-26-2008, 08:58 PM
Is this not a propaganda???:


1.Thus, the Archaeoraptor fossil is similar to the earlier Piltdown Man fraud committed by evolutionists. Archaeoraptor was even described under the headline "Piltdown Bird" in the well-known magazine New Scientist. The report states that Archaeoraptor was formed by adding the tail of a dromaeosaurus, a genuine dinosaur, to a bird fossil, and that this was a fraud perpetrated in the name of science.
1) Mix and match: Archaeoraptor seems to consist of the tail of a dromaeosaur, glued to a fossil bird's body (above).



2.Many characteristics of the australopithecines' head, such as a low forehead, a large eyebrow ridge, a flat nose, and a jutting jaw constitute evidence that these creatures were no different from today's apes.


Extensive research done on various Australopithecus specimens has shown that these creatures did not walk upright in human manner. In fact, it is impossible for them to have done so, because they had the anatomy of apes, which enabled them only to walk on all fours. The human skeleton, on the other hand, is designed to walk upright.



"GOODBYE, LUCY"
3.Scientific discoveries have revealed evolutionist assumptions regarding "Lucy," once considered the most important example of the Australopithecus genus, as completely unfounded. Actually, each new discovery in paleontology causes evolutionists to redesign their tree of life, which is nothing but a figment of their imagination.



4.As seen in this picture, there is no difference between the postcranial skeleton of modern man and that of Homo erectus. It is now an acknowledged fact in the scientific community that Homo erectus is a superfluous taxon, and that fossils assigned to the Homo erectus class are actually not so different from Homo sapiens as to be considered a different species. This thesis can be summarized as "Homo erectus is not a different species from Homo sapiens, but rather a race within Homo sapiens."





5.RichardLeakey (left) and Alan Walker, who studied the Turkana Boy fossil-the most complete known specimen of Homo erectus-concluded that it belonged to a 12-year-old boy 1.6 meters tall. The interesting thing is that there is no major difference between this 1.6 million-year-old fossil and people of our day. This situation reveals once again that Homo erectus was a genuine human race, with no "primitive" features.



6.Even if evolutionists are unsuccessful in finding scientific evidence to support their theories, they are very successful at one thing:propaganda. The most important element of this propaganda is the practice of creating false designs known as "reconstructions."


Acanthostega and What it Brings to Mind

7.Acanthostega is a sea creature with gills. Its age is estimated at some 360 million years. Jenny Clack, a paleontologist from Cambridge University, maintains that this fossil possesses a hand, and that on this hand there are eight fingers, for which reason it is an intermediate form between fish and tetrapods (four-footed land vertebrates). Taking this fossil as their starting point, evolutionists claim that instead of fish developing feet after moving onto the land, they first developed feet and then made that transition. Yet this claim is inconsistent. First of all, despite being an evolutionist, Clack clearly states that she does not know whether Acanthostega made the transition to the land or not. It is an error to regard a marine-dwelling creature with certain bone-like structures in its fins as a form that brought about the transition from sea to land. The fact that evolutionists are making this error shows how quickly they have forgotten their mistakes over the Coelacanth, which was discovered to be living up until 65 years ago.


When they only had fossils of Coelacanths, evolutionist paleontologists put forward a number of Darwinist assumptions regarding them;however, when living examples were found, all these assumptions were shattered.


Up until the end of 1930s, evolutionists portrayed the Coelacanth as an intermediate form. It was thought that the bones in the fins of this 200-million-year-old fossil turned into feet, which carried the creature when it moved onto the land. In 1938, however, they learnt to their great surprise that Coelacanth was still living. On close examination, it was revealed that these fish caught by fishermen off the coast of Madagascar had undergone no changes at all in the last 200 million years. Furthermore, the organ which evolutionists had believed to be a primitive lung turned out to be nothing but a fat-filled swimbladder. Moreover, a great many more Coelacanths were caught shortly afterwards, and evolutionists had to abandon forever the claim that the creature represented an intermediate form.

As can be seen from the Coelacanth example, as well as that of Acanthostega, marine creatures with bone-like structures are portrayed as intermediate forms, not because they might have been able to live on land, but because of evolutionists' prejudices.



8.Evolutionists cannot reach an agreement even on the most basic topics regarding their theory such as when and where the first human beings emerged and how they spread around the world. The "out of Africa" theory (above left) holds that the first human beings emerged in Africa and then emigrated to all around the world. In contrast, some researchers such as Milford Wolpoff maintain that human beings evolved not only in Africa but simultaneously in Africa, Europe, and Asia (below left). These contradictory theses show one thing:that man never underwent an evolutionary process.

9.A documentary about dinosaurs was broadcast on The Discovery Channel in January 2003. Most of the film was devoted to the way dinosaurs lived. Various dinosaur fossils were presented, and speculations advanced regarding their feeding habits and whether they were carnivorous. In the light of major fossil discoveries, particularly on the continents of Asia and America, the program tried to establish the migratory routes that these giant creatures might have followed.

The last 10 minutes of the film consisted of an introduction to the matter of "feathered dinosaurs," so frequently alluded to in evolutionist propaganda. It was maintained that feathers had been found on one fossil, called Caudipteryx, and that this fossil represented an intermediate form in the so-called evolution of birds.


The first of the two fossils given in the film is Sinosauropteryx. When this fossil was first found, in 1996, it was claimed that it had structures similar to feathers. However, later detailed analysis in 1997 revealed that these structures had nothing at all to do with feathers. The evolutionists therefore abandoned their claims that the creature had been feathered.

The second species alleged in the documentary to have been feathered is Caudipteryx. Evolutionists are unanimous that Caudipteryx lacked the power of flight. The creature had short arms and long legs, and possessed an anatomy far better suited to running. The main feature to invalidate the thesis that Caudipteryx might have been the ancestor to the birds is its age. Caudipteryx, which Phil Currie attempts to portray as a transitional species, is some 120 million years old. Archaeopteryx, the oldest known bird, is 30 million years older than that. The 150-million-year old bird Archaeopteryx is solid evidence that Caudipteryx was not an intermediate species. Archaeopteryx lived long before Caudipteryx and was able to fly perfectly, just like modern birds.



The dino-bird theory actually constitutes a rather superficial propaganda tool, which is why even some evolutionist scientists reject it. In an article in New Scientist, the famous ornithologist Alan Feduccia sets out the anatomical differences between birds and dinosaurs and states that from the paleontological point of view the theory is a disgrace:

Well, I've studied bird skulls for 25 years and I don't see any similarities whatsoever. I just don't see it... The theropod [a bipedal, meat-eating dinosaur] origins of birds, in my opinion, will be the greatest embarrassment of paleontology of the 20th century.1

Another ornithologist, Larry Martin, makes this comment in the same article:

To tell you the truth, if I had to support the dinosaur origin of birds with those characters, I'd be embarrassed every time I had to get up and talk about it.2

Birds are the origin of birds. It is out of the question for dinosaurs or any other land animal to have come by the power of flight as a result of gradual mutations. That is because birds' bodies are specially designed to fly. When one examines the bird wing, feather, lung, and other structures, one encounters particular features peculiar to flight that are not found on any land creatures. The most important feature of this design is its irreducible nature. The wing, lung, and feather need to be present in perfect form in order for flight to be possible. One Turkish evolutionist, Engin Konur, says:

The common trait of the eyes and the wings is that they can only function if they are fully developed. In other words, a halfway-developed eye cannot see; a bird with half-formed wings cannot fly. How these organs came into being has remained one of the mysteries of nature that needs to be elucidated.



WHICH ONE IS THE REAL NEANDERTHAL?
10.Some drawings show Neanderthal man as a family father; others present him as a savage animal or a transitional form between ape and man. However, in truth, Neanderthals were human beings. Their only difference from modern man is that their skeletons are more robust and their cranial capacity slightly bigger.
Although fossil discoveries show that Neanderthals had no "primitive" features as compared to us and were a human race, the evolutionist prejudices regarding them continue unabated. Neanderthal man is still sometimes described as an "ape-man" in some publications. This is an indication of the extent to which Darwinism rests on prejudice and propaganda, not on scientific discoveries.


Neanderthal flute



11.On the cover of Time magazine's July, 23, 2001, issue was a painting of an ape-man called Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba. The painting was based on some fragmentary bones recently found in Ethiopia. Time assured its readers that the creature walked upright, giving as evidence for this nothing but a single toe bone which was actually found some sixteen kilometers (ten miles) from the other bones. However, Time's claim that this creature was a human ancestor was discredited by later studies on the toe bone.


"Chimps on Two Legs Run Through Darwin's Theory"


12.A news report in the Scottish newspaper The Scotsman revealed that scientists studying chimpanzees in Uganda have discovered groups of chimpanzees walking around on two legs. This discovery destroyed the false evolutionist claims holding that man evolved from quadrupedal apes and that an evolutionary progression took place from primitive to more developed species.



13.Darwinism claims that living beings have evolved as a result of coincidences and by means of a struggle for life. This evil morality advises people to be egoistical, self-seeking, cruel and oppressive. The only possible solution that can save humanity from this benighted way of thinking is the widespread acceptance of the values of religion.

BBC's Bacteria Myth


14.In this picture, magnified 15,000 times, can be seen the DNA molecule of a bacterium which has been exposed to special intervention. There are 4 million base pairs in this bacterium's DNA, and if this DNA were stretched out flat it would be 1.5 mm long, or 1,000 times longer than the cell itself. Just the way in which such a complex structure is squeezed into such a restricted space shows the fine detail in God's art of creation.



15Evolutionists claim that amino acids came about by chance in what they call the "primeval soup" and that the first life emerged in this way. If it were really that easy to witness the emergence of living things, why do evolutionists not carry out an experiment by throwing such materials into a swimming pool? Moreover, they can establish such conditions as they wish by means of modern technology. Random effects could even be eliminated in the conditions of this primitive world; consciously directed mutations could be employed instead of random ones.
They could even be permitted to use ready-made proteins and all the substances necessary for life, from nitrogen to carbon. In addition, if they say "We need time" they can pass the site of the experiment on to one another for billions of years as a legacy. Yet despite all these many facilities, evolutionists will never be able to form professors of biology who study the cells which comprise their own bodies, roses, tigers, tomatoes or brain surgeons in such a place. All that will emerge is a brown, muddy water.



16.Trilobites were among the first known animals with efficient eyes. These had many crystal lenses fixed at different angles to register movement and light from different directions. This 530-million-year-old compound eye structure is an "optical marvel" which worked with a double lens system. This fact totally invalidates Darwinism's assumption that complex eyes evolved from "primitive" eyes.



17.Darwinists hold that some small dinosaurs, such as Velociraptors or Dromaeosaurs, evolved by acquiring wings and then starting to fly. Thus, Archaeopteryx is assumed to be a transitional form that branched off from its dinosaur ancestors and started to fly for the first time. However, the latest studies of Archaeopteryx fossils indicate that it is absolutely not a transitional form, but an extinct species of bird, having some insignificant differences from modern birds.




NON-STOP FLIGHT
The swift's long, curved wings enable it to fly continuously at an average speed of about 40 kph (25 mph)
SWIFT FLIGHT
The swift alternates fast wingbeats with short glides.
SPEED IN BURSTS
The kingfisher's fast but short flight is achieved on stubby triangular wings. This wing shape helps the bird to take off from the water after a dive.
KINGFISHER FLIGHT
Whirring wingbeats carry the kingfisher between perches. It can brake in mid-air to dive for fish.


PEREGRINE FLIGHT
The peregrine falcon divers with its wings partially folded. This method of catching prey is known as "stooping".
SPEED RECORD HOLDER
The peregrine falcon is the world's fastest bird. Although its speed is often exaggerated, it can probably dive at a breath-taking 280 kph (175 mph) in pursuit of other birds. As it dives, it slashes its victim with its talons, knocking it to the ground with the force of the impact.


Then how can I believe in those scientists,paleontologists.....???



They said 'Glory be to You!
We have no knowledge except what
You have taught us. You are the
All-Knowing, the All-Wise.'
(Surat al-Baqara: 32)
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Trumble
02-26-2008, 10:23 PM
I really can't be bothered to go through all that yet again as it's been done so many times before. Lets's just settle for saying none of it is a "definitive reply" to anything except in Yahya's vivid imagination. I'm not sure which is the most depressing, the fact that the man continues to draw totally unsupportable conclusions from carefully selected 'facts' and out of context quotes, or that he has audience who really can't see that that is what he is doing.

However, just a quick word on the frauds, though. Yahya keeps banging on about Piltdown Man. Why? It was indeed a notorious fraud but Yahya's implied claim the whole thing was conjured up by the scientific/'evolutionist' community desperate to support a failing theory is completely unsupportable. As I said last time this cropped up it was in fact that same community (albeit only 'twigging' after some time) that exposed the fraud. As to who was responsible, we still don't know. According to Wiki the most likely candidate is a Charles Dawson;

The recent focus on Charles Dawson as the sole forger is supported by the gradual accumulation of evidence regarding other archaeological hoaxes he perpetrated in the decade or two prior to the Piltdown discovery. Beginning in 1895, he appears to have made dozens of minor 'discoveries' including the first evidence of cast-iron figure-casting in Roman Britain, a medieval clockface, a flint arrowhead and shaft, and a number of other remarkable finds that were later, long after his early death, proven to be forgeries. On one occasion, as an example, a collection of flints he exchanged with another collector, Hugh Morris, turned out to have been aged with chemicals, a point Morris noted down at the time and which was later unearthed. There were also numerous individuals in the Surrey area well-acquainted with Dawson who long held doubts about Piltdown and of Dawson's role in the matter, but given the sheer weight of scholarly affirmation regarding the find few if any were willing to publicly speak out for fear of being ridiculed for their trouble.

Sometimes he may have appropriated the finds usually made by workmen by reporting them to scientific journals as if they were his own discoveries. Most of his written works proved to be uncredited collations of the work of others, material that but for the period would have drawn outright accusations of gross plagiarism. His History of Hastings castle is a prime example.

His initial motivations may well have lain along the lines of gaining further fame and notoriety in his native Surrey, but it is clear that his increasingly successful early frauds may well have emboldened him to pull off the master stroke that would have landed him his most cherished goal, that of a fellowship in the prestigious Royal Society. It was an ambition that ultimately went unfulfilled.
Wiki

Science is a human activity, and wherever there is human activity there are human failings. Piltdown man is no more a black mark against evolutionary theory than other recent scandals have been to cloning and fusion research.

Much the same is probably true in relation to the Archaeoraptor, and indeed it was never generally accepted by the scientific community at all. In this case, in fact, the motives are rather clearer.

The purported fossil of "Archaeoraptor" was presented in 1998 at a gem show in Tucson, Arizona. It had been found in July 1997 in the Liaoning Province of China, sold on the black market and smuggled out of China and into the United States. The Dinosaur Museum in Blanding, Utah, purchased it. The Museum is run by Stephen Czerkas, who does not hold a university degree, but who is a dinosaur enthusiast and artist, and his wife, Sylvia Czerkas. He arranged for patrons of his museum, including trustee Dale Slade, to provide $80,000 for the purchase of the fossil. Christopher Sloan (see below) says that Czerkas intended the fossil to be "the crown jewel" of the Dinosaur Museum.[3]

The Czerkases contacted paleontologist Phil Currie and the National Geographic Society. Currie agreed to study the fossil on condition that it was eventually returned to China. The society intended to announce the find to the larger public, immediately after a publication in Nature. During the first investigation it already became clear to Currie that the left and right leg mirrored each other perfectly and that the fossil had been completed by using both slab and counterslab. He then sent it to Timothy Rowe in Austin to make CAT scans. These indicated that the bottom fragments were not part of the larger fossil. This was confirmed through a close study by Currie's preparator, Kevin Aulenback. Currie did not inform National Geographic of these problems.[4]

The fossil was unveiled in a press conference on October 15, 1999, and the November 1999 National Geographic Magazine contained an article by Christopher P. Sloan (National Geographic's art editor). Sloan described it as a missing link that would connect dinosaurs and birds. The original fossil was put on display at the National Geographic Society in Washington, DC, pending return to China. In the article Sloan used the name Archaeoraptor liaoningensis but with a disclaimer (so that it would not count as a nomenclatural act for the purposes of scientific classification[5]) in anticipation of being able to publish a peer-reviewed description simultaneously in Nature. However, Nature rejected the paper. Czerkas then sent the manuscript to Science, which sent it out for peer review. Two reviewers informed Science that; “the specimen was smuggled out of China and illegally purchased” and that the fossil had been "doctored" in China "to enhance its value".Science then rejected the paper. According to Sloan, Czerkas did not inform National Geographic about the details of the two rejections.[3]
Wiki

So, no, neither is "propaganda", just examples of the eternal human quests for fame and money. As usual, the only propaganda is the distorted rubbish supplied by Yahya. It was not a "fraud perpetrated in the name of science", it was a fraud perpetrated 'in the name of' conning $80,000 out of a gullible private museum owner. Using that as an excuse not to trust paleontologists is much the same as saying you can't trust doctors just because some charlatan claims to have created a miracle pill that helps you lose weight while still eating cream-cakes all day.
Reply

Dr.Trax
02-28-2008, 11:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
So, no, neither is "propaganda", just examples of the eternal human quests for fame and money. As usual, the only propaganda is the distorted rubbish supplied by Yahya. It was not a "fraud perpetrated in the name of science", it was a fraud perpetrated 'in the name of' conning $80,000 out of a gullible private museum owner. Using that as an excuse not to trust paleontologists is much the same as saying you can't trust doctors just because some charlatan claims to have created a miracle pill that helps you lose weight while still eating cream-cakes all day.
Oh yea?!That's what you think.Sometimes you can't trust also to doctors!
Maybe you are quite young and you have not experienced that!But I have...
Reply

Trumble
02-28-2008, 11:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Dr.Trax
Oh yea?!That's what you think.Sometimes you can't trust also to doctors!
Maybe you are quite young and you have not experienced that!But I have...
There are a few bad eggs in every basket, at least when the metaphorical basket contains human beings. That includes everything from clerics to medics.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10-14-2012, 10:06 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-27-2012, 06:34 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-17-2011, 05:29 AM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-01-2010, 04:59 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-01-2007, 04:19 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!