The Evolution 'Hoax'

[hilly7]

There is a law in physics that must be obeyed that isn't in the big bang theory.

""Big-Bang Theory Exposed As Hoax" - Dipso Maniak, K.B., D.A.
For the last year, I have been working in close collaboration with Baron Beavis von Buttköpf at his new observatory near Schloss Rattzhärz in the Bavarian Alps. The Baron recently installed a new telescope featuring a segmented fly's-eye multiple-mirror with an overall diameter of 32 metres. Each segment is a flat hexagon of polished plate glass, 2 metres in diameter, and 8mm thick, bent to the appropriate paraboloidal figure by a complex system of hydraulic jacks and suction pads controlled by a Local-Area Network (LAN) of fifty Commodore 64 computers.
The telescope is similar to the New Generation Telescope at Siding Spring Observatory, the computer driven alt-azimuth mount being based on a turntable modified from a disused roundabout.

Working on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, in which light and space curves back upon itself, the Baron realised that if there had actually been a Big Bang at the start of the Universe as we know it, with light curving back in a circle, and plenty of intervening galaxy clusters, black holes and quasars to assist with gravitational lensing, at least in a few places in the sky the Big Bang should be seen going off.

Over the past year, the Baron and I have searched the whole of the northern sky without success, and tentatively plan to move the telescope on a portable mount to the Western (upper) Observing Field at Wiruna for the 2002 South Pacific Star Party to commence a search of the southern sky.

Meanwhile, we have examined the faulty physics on which the Big Bang Theory was based, and consider there is sufficient evidence to revive the Steady State Theory - i.e. the continuous creation of matter.

In Einstein’s day, few atomic particles were recognised. Since then, they have been discovered by the score - Quarks, Leptons, Vogons etc. Clearly the universe is a seething soup of sub-atomic matter not detectable by astronomers until, by some as yet undetermined mating mechanism, some of these particles get together to produce matter as we know it - apparently popping out of empty space. This elegantly accounts for the missing mass of the Universe, and the Red Shift. Light is being slowed down, pushing its way through this stuff, while the so called blue shift is light getting gravitational assistance by the slingshot method of acceleration - a close fly-by of a dense field of sub-atomic particles.

The Baron offers proof in an elegant and public way. By his calculation, the sound of the Big Bang should have been echoing around the Universe these past billions of years, and although sound does not travel in a vacuum, with the accepted density of interstellar space being one atom per cubic centimetre, a Bang as great as the Big one should have been propagated through such density at 99.2% of the speed of light, the sound wave being composed of super compressed photo-neutrinos. Should there have been a Big Bang, he predicts that the sound should be heard on planet Earth at 14:20pm UT on April 2, 2001. Should the sound not be heard, the Baron maintains that his theory is thus vindicated." http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/AU3/bigbang.asp


The Big Bang According To Atheist, Sir Fred Hoyle http://www.connectionmagazine.org/2002_05/co_colson.htm

Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science Part 3
http://www.realtruth.org/articles/080804...ience.html


I'll have to find the one the one that explains the physicis.

[hilly7]

Here's the other one, happens at about 1600 on the time frame. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZR022_GbzU

[clark-kent]

Quote:There is a law in physics that must be obeyed that isn't in the big bang theory.

""Big-Bang Theory Exposed As Hoax" - Dipso Maniak, K.B., D.A.
For the last year, I have been working in close collaboration with Baron Beavis von Buttköpf at his new observatory near Schloss Rattzhärz in the Bavarian Alps. The Baron recently installed a new telescope featuring a segmented fly's-eye multiple-mirror with an overall diameter of 32 metres. Each segment is a flat hexagon of polished plate glass, 2 metres in diameter, and 8mm thick, bent to the appropriate paraboloidal figure by a complex system of hydraulic jacks and suction pads controlled by a Local-Area Network (LAN) of fifty Commodore 64 computers.
The telescope is similar to the New Generation Telescope at Siding Spring Observatory, the computer driven alt-azimuth mount being based on a turntable modified from a disused roundabout.

Working on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, in which light and space curves back upon itself, the Baron realised that if there had actually been a Big Bang at the start of the Universe as we know it, with light curving back in a circle, and plenty of intervening galaxy clusters, black holes and quasars to assist with gravitational lensing, at least in a few places in the sky the Big Bang should be seen going off.

Over the past year, the Baron and I have searched the whole of the northern sky without success, and tentatively plan to move the telescope on a portable mount to the Western (upper) Observing Field at Wiruna for the 2002 South Pacific Star Party to commence a search of the southern sky.

Meanwhile, we have examined the faulty physics on which the Big Bang Theory was based, and consider there is sufficient evidence to revive the Steady State Theory - i.e. the continuous creation of matter.

In Einstein’s day, few atomic particles were recognised. Since then, they have been discovered by the score - Quarks, Leptons, Vogons etc. Clearly the universe is a seething soup of sub-atomic matter not detectable by astronomers until, by some as yet undetermined mating mechanism, some of these particles get together to produce matter as we know it - apparently popping out of empty space. This elegantly accounts for the missing mass of the Universe, and the Red Shift. Light is being slowed down, pushing its way through this stuff, while the so called blue shift is light getting gravitational assistance by the slingshot method of acceleration - a close fly-by of a dense field of sub-atomic particles.

The Baron offers proof in an elegant and public way. By his calculation, the sound of the Big Bang should have been echoing around the Universe these past billions of years, and although sound does not travel in a vacuum, with the accepted density of interstellar space being one atom per cubic centimetre, a Bang as great as the Big one should have been propagated through such density at 99.2% of the speed of light, the sound wave being composed of super compressed photo-neutrinos. Should there have been a Big Bang, he predicts that the sound should be heard on planet Earth at 14:20pm UT on April 2, 2001. Should the sound not be heard, the Baron maintains that his theory is thus vindicated." http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/AU3/bigbang.asp


The Big Bang According To Atheist, Sir Fred Hoyle http://www.connectionmagazine.org/2002_05/co_colson.htm

Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science Part 3
http://www.realtruth.org/articles/080804...ience.html


I'll have to find the one the one that explains the physicis.

http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/index.asp

Alternate UNIVERSE
Journal of the Astrological Society of New South Wales Un-coordinated.

Alternate Universe is a comical version of the Astronomical Society of New South Wales' monthly journal UNIVERSE, and is released to the general public on 1st April each year.

Alternate Universe is not affiliated with nor related to the Astronomical Society of New South Wales, in any way whatsoever.

Alternate Universe is now available online, with each back-issue listed below.

Volume 1: 1 April, 1999: PDF | HTML
Volume 2: 1 April, 2000: PDF | HTML
Volume 3: 1 April, 2001: PDF | HTML
Volume 4: 1 April, 2002: PDF | HTML
Volume 5: 1 April, 2003: PDF | HTML
Volume 6: 1 April, 2004: PDF | HTML
Volume 7: 1 April, 2005: PDF | HTML
Volume 8: 1 April, 2006: PDF | HTML
Volume 9: 1 April, 2007: PDF | HTML
Volume 10: 1 April, 2008: PDF | HTML

If you have any astronomy related bootleg articles you would like published in Alternate Universe, please feel free to send them into us via email, and we will consider publishing them in an upcoming issue.


http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/...taries.asp


"Observing Faint Planetaries In The Fornax Dwarf" - Baron Beavis von Buttköpf
Deep Sky observers seeking a challenge can do worse than to cruise the fainter Planetary Nebulae of the Fornax Dwarf Galaxy.

Baron Beavis von Buttköpf from Schloss Ratzharz has made extensive observations from his private observatory at Schloss Nilskor in the crystal clear air of the high Bavarian Alps using a variety of instruments and has kindly sent a selection of his observing notes, which are reproduced here with his kind permission:

Tron 96: Faint green rosette outgassing by a suspected black hole, about 3 arcsec in diameter - easy in the 40" Schiefspiegger but a challenge in the 32" Wurlitzer - usually at mag 23, but flares occasionally to mag 17.

Holmes 14: Legendary object - rarely visible owing to death of parent star, last seen dimly over 10 years ago.

Murrell 27: Clear, but dim smoke ring - 2 arcsec in diameter and steady at mag 18. Down a bit and left a bit from the foreground 16th mag red giant. Best seen with averted imagination. Can be seen in 36" but only by the discoverer.

ASV 99: Highly active object, spread over a broad area, and best seen in a rich field 60".

AAT 1: The Baron has searched in vain for this highly condensed object. Suspect it may be a flyspeck on a Schmidt plate.




Are you posting parody as science?

[Dr Richard H Thorndyke]

Quote:There is a law in physics that must be obeyed that isn't in the big bang theory.

""Big-Bang Theory Exposed As Hoax" - Dipso Maniak, K.B., D.A.
For the last year, I have been working in close collaboration with Baron Beavis von Buttköpf at his new observatory near Schloss Rattzhärz in the Bavarian Alps. The Baron recently installed a new telescope featuring a segmented fly's-eye multiple-mirror with an overall diameter of 32 metres. Each segment is a flat hexagon of polished plate glass, 2 metres in diameter, and 8mm thick, bent to the appropriate paraboloidal figure by a complex system of hydraulic jacks and suction pads controlled by a Local-Area Network (LAN) of fifty Commodore 64 computers.
The telescope is similar to the New Generation Telescope at Siding Spring Observatory, the computer driven alt-azimuth mount being based on a turntable modified from a disused roundabout.

Dipso Maniak? Baron Beavis von Buttkopf? Schloss Rattzharz? Commodore 64 computers? Disused roundabout?

Someone hasn't read the link!!

Quote:In Einstein’s day, few atomic particles were recognised. Since then, they have been discovered by the score - Quarks, Leptons, Vogons etc. Clearly the universe is a seething soup of sub-atomic matter not detectable by astronomers until, by some as yet undetermined mating mechanism, some of these particles get together to produce matter as we know it - apparently popping out of empty space. This elegantly accounts for the missing mass of the Universe, and the Red Shift. Light is being slowed down, pushing its way through this stuff, while the so called blue shift is light getting gravitational assistance by the slingshot method of acceleration - a close fly-by of a dense field of sub-atomic particles.

Vogons? Surely not the characters from The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy by (atheist author) Douglas Adams.:LOL:

Quote:The Big Bang According To Atheist, Sir Fred Hoyle http://www.connectionmagazine.org/2002_05/co_colson.htm

Fred Hoyle was wrong.

Please explain to us the discovery of Cosmic Background Radiation by Penzias and Wilson (Bell Labs, 1964) in the context of your pseudo-scientific belief system (if you can). Do you even know what you are talking about? Also posting a link to a Christian opinion based website isn't evidence.

Quote:Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science Part 3
http://www.realtruth.org/articles/080804...ience.html

Again, an opinion based blog is NOT evidence of Creationism. Where are the references on that site so we can cross check it? Oh, there aren't any!!

Quote:I'll have to find the one the one that explains the physicis.

You'll have to find one that explains how you were suckered by a joke site first!!:LOL:

Is it because you lack even a basic knowledge of the sciences that you'll use the first links Google spews up as evidence?

[hilly7]

Dr Dino was something I watched a long time ago. I have no problem quoting an Atheist, why do you have a problem quoting a Christain view? Here, I done another Google search for you for YOUR information. Notice the word THEORY:

By the middle of the 20th century, cosmologists had developed two different theories to explain the creation of the universe. Some supported the steady-state theory, which states that the universe has always existed and will continue to survive without noticeable change. Others believed in the Big Bang theory, which states that the universe was created in a massive explosion-like event about 13.7 billion years ago.


"The first published recognition of the CBR as a detectable phenomenon appeared in a brief paper by Soviet astrophysicists A. G. Doroshkevich and Igor Novikov, entitled "Mean Density of Radiation in the Metagalaxy and Certain Problems in Relativistic Cosmology", in the spring of 1964.[1]

Working at Bell Labs in Holmdel, New Jersey, in 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were experimenting with a supersensitive, 6 meters(20 ft) horn antenna originally built to detect radio waves bounced off echo balloon satellites. To measure these faint radio waves, they had to eliminate all recognizable interference from their receiver. They removed the effects of radar and radio broadcasting, and suppressed interference from the heat in the receiver itself by cooling it with liquid helium to −269 °C, only 4 °C above absolute zero.

When Penzias and Wilson reduced their data they found a low, steady, mysterious noise that persisted in their receiver. This residual noise was 100 times more intense than they had expected, was evenly spread over the sky, and was present day and night. They were certain that the radiation they detected on a wavelength of 7.35 centimeters did not come from the Earth, the Sun, or our galaxy. After thoroughly checking their equipment, removing some pigeons nesting in the antenna and cleaning out the accumulated droppings, the noise remained. Both concluded that this noise was coming from outside our own galaxy--although they were not aware of any radio source that would account for it.

At that same time, Robert H. Dicke, Jim Peebles, and David Wilkinson, astrophysicists at Princeton University just 60 km (40 miles) away, were preparing to search for microwave radiation in this region of the spectrum. Dicke and his colleagues reasoned that the Big Bang must have scattered not only the matter that condensed into galaxies but also must have released a tremendous blast of radiation. With the proper instrumentation, this radiation should be detectable.

When a friend (Bernard F. Burke, Prof. of Physics at MIT) told Penzias about a preprint paper he had seen by Jim Peebles on the possibility of finding radiation left over from an explosion that filled the universe at the beginning of its existence, Penzias and Wilson began to realize the significance of their discovery. The characteristics of the radiation detected by Penzias and Wilson fit exactly the radiation predicted by Robert H. Dicke and his colleagues at Princeton University. Penzias called Dicke at Princeton, who immediately sent him a copy of the still-unpublished Peebles paper. Penzias read the paper and called Dicke again and invited him to Bell Labs to look at the Horn Antenna and listen to the background noise. Robert Dicke, P. J. E. Peebles, P. G. Roll and D. T. Wilkinson interpreted this radiation as a signature of the Big Bang.

To avoid potential conflict, they decided to publish their results jointly. Two notes were rushed to the Astrophysical Journal Letters. In the first, Dicke and his associates outlined the importance of cosmic background radiation as substantiation of the Big Bang Theory. In a second note, jointly signed by Penzias and Wilson titled, "A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Megacycles per Second," they noted the existence of the residual background noise and attributed a possible explanation to that given by Dicke in his companion letter.

In 1978, Penzias and Wilson were awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics for their joint discovery."

That equates to look asshole, your science isn't based on facts either. THEORY is not FACT. Go back to grazing sheep, your master have trained you well. Beware one hand clapping.

[hilly7]

Quote:

Quote:There is a law in physics that must be obeyed that isn't in the big bang theory.

""Big-Bang Theory Exposed As Hoax" - Dipso Maniak, K.B., D.A.
For the last year, I have been working in close collaboration with Baron Beavis von Buttköpf at his new observatory near Schloss Rattzhärz in the Bavarian Alps. The Baron recently installed a new telescope featuring a segmented fly's-eye multiple-mirror with an overall diameter of 32 metres. Each segment is a flat hexagon of polished plate glass, 2 metres in diameter, and 8mm thick, bent to the appropriate paraboloidal figure by a complex system of hydraulic jacks and suction pads controlled by a Local-Area Network (LAN) of fifty Commodore 64 computers.
The telescope is similar to the New Generation Telescope at Siding Spring Observatory, the computer driven alt-azimuth mount being based on a turntable modified from a disused roundabout.

Working on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, in which light and space curves back upon itself, the Baron realised that if there had actually been a Big Bang at the start of the Universe as we know it, with light curving back in a circle, and plenty of intervening galaxy clusters, black holes and quasars to assist with gravitational lensing, at least in a few places in the sky the Big Bang should be seen going off.

Over the past year, the Baron and I have searched the whole of the northern sky without success, and tentatively plan to move the telescope on a portable mount to the Western (upper) Observing Field at Wiruna for the 2002 South Pacific Star Party to commence a search of the southern sky.

Meanwhile, we have examined the faulty physics on which the Big Bang Theory was based, and consider there is sufficient evidence to revive the Steady State Theory - i.e. the continuous creation of matter.

In Einstein’s day, few atomic particles were recognised. Since then, they have been discovered by the score - Quarks, Leptons, Vogons etc. Clearly the universe is a seething soup of sub-atomic matter not detectable by astronomers until, by some as yet undetermined mating mechanism, some of these particles get together to produce matter as we know it - apparently popping out of empty space. This elegantly accounts for the missing mass of the Universe, and the Red Shift. Light is being slowed down, pushing its way through this stuff, while the so called blue shift is light getting gravitational assistance by the slingshot method of acceleration - a close fly-by of a dense field of sub-atomic particles.

The Baron offers proof in an elegant and public way. By his calculation, the sound of the Big Bang should have been echoing around the Universe these past billions of years, and although sound does not travel in a vacuum, with the accepted density of interstellar space being one atom per cubic centimetre, a Bang as great as the Big one should have been propagated through such density at 99.2% of the speed of light, the sound wave being composed of super compressed photo-neutrinos. Should there have been a Big Bang, he predicts that the sound should be heard on planet Earth at 14:20pm UT on April 2, 2001. Should the sound not be heard, the Baron maintains that his theory is thus vindicated." http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/AU3/bigbang.asp


The Big Bang According To Atheist, Sir Fred Hoyle http://www.connectionmagazine.org/2002_05/co_colson.htm

Evolution Exposed: Deconstructing False Science Part 3
http://www.realtruth.org/articles/080804...ience.html


I'll have to find the one the one that explains the physicis.

http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/index.asp

Alternate UNIVERSE
Journal of the Astrological Society of New South Wales Un-coordinated.

Alternate Universe is a comical version of the Astronomical Society of New South Wales' monthly journal UNIVERSE, and is released to the general public on 1st April each year.

Alternate Universe is not affiliated with nor related to the Astronomical Society of New South Wales, in any way whatsoever.

Alternate Universe is now available online, with each back-issue listed below.

Volume 1: 1 April, 1999: PDF | HTML
Volume 2: 1 April, 2000: PDF | HTML
Volume 3: 1 April, 2001: PDF | HTML
Volume 4: 1 April, 2002: PDF | HTML
Volume 5: 1 April, 2003: PDF | HTML
Volume 6: 1 April, 2004: PDF | HTML
Volume 7: 1 April, 2005: PDF | HTML
Volume 8: 1 April, 2006: PDF | HTML
Volume 9: 1 April, 2007: PDF | HTML
Volume 10: 1 April, 2008: PDF | HTML

If you have any astronomy related bootleg articles you would like published in Alternate Universe, please feel free to send them into us via email, and we will consider publishing them in an upcoming issue.


http://www.asnsw.com/universe/alternate/...taries.asp


"Observing Faint Planetaries In The Fornax Dwarf" - Baron Beavis von Buttköpf
Deep Sky observers seeking a challenge can do worse than to cruise the fainter Planetary Nebulae of the Fornax Dwarf Galaxy.

Baron Beavis von Buttköpf from Schloss Ratzharz has made extensive observations from his private observatory at Schloss Nilskor in the crystal clear air of the high Bavarian Alps using a variety of instruments and has kindly sent a selection of his observing notes, which are reproduced here with his kind permission:

Tron 96: Faint green rosette outgassing by a suspected black hole, about 3 arcsec in diameter - easy in the 40" Schiefspiegger but a challenge in the 32" Wurlitzer - usually at mag 23, but flares occasionally to mag 17.

Holmes 14: Legendary object - rarely visible owing to death of parent star, last seen dimly over 10 years ago.

Murrell 27: Clear, but dim smoke ring - 2 arcsec in diameter and steady at mag 18. Down a bit and left a bit from the foreground 16th mag red giant. Best seen with averted imagination. Can be seen in 36" but only by the discoverer.

ASV 99: Highly active object, spread over a broad area, and best seen in a rich field 60".

AAT 1: The Baron has searched in vain for this highly condensed object. Suspect it may be a flyspeck on a Schmidt plate.




Are you posting parody as science?

Not really, just that science is mostly like religion, 1/2 facts and 1/2 speculation. Religion uses the word faith, science uses the word theory or spectulative. Nice site though, beautiful.

[Melchor]

When the "Big Bang" was still a conceptual 0 dimensional potential, there was the steady state. Then the "Big Bang" exploded onto the scene. It expanded rapidly with institutional dogma entrenching fitting the information to the theory. Problems arose, and suddenly the laws of physics didn't apply because they didn't exist yet. Every hole in the theory was patched up with new constants to balance the equations and mysterious unobserved phenomena to explain the problems. Alas, the "Big Bang" hype is now slowing, and eventually it will collapse under the gravity of its own faulty assumptions back into the void leaving once again the steady state.

[JazzRoc]

Quote:My only point was that often people claim that humanity is the pinnacle of natural design. That seems to be the point you're making.

Not at all! Nowhere near! It's an ongoing process which only a 50Km asteroid could stop (or similar). Pinnacle indeed!:)

[Melchor]

Quote:

Quote:My only point was that often people claim that humanity is the pinnacle of natural design. That seems to be the point you're making.

Not at all! Nowhere near! It's an ongoing process which only a 50Km asteroid could stop (or similar). Pinnacle indeed!:)

Well sorry I misinterpreted your statement.:unsure:

[ToddTraf]

"Baron Beavis von Buttköpf" Are you serious? Beavis and butthead? Really?

[jack]

Which type of evolution are we referring to ?

I would say that there is no hoax and plenty of observable proof of - Microevolution - variations within kinds.
But one species into a completely new one, - yes, where are all the missing links ?
Everyone was already here when I arrived, and they haven't changed yet, nor in the recorded history of today's man.

Maybe primordial soup, turned into cells, turned into fish, turned into reptiles, turned into mammals, turned into primates and then man, - maybe not.

One would think with all the bright minds and hard work they put into this theory it would sound a little more believable by now, have some testable, provable facts. Something that leaves less room for debate. I find it very hard to believe that one species can turn into a different one (without manipulation,) I hear about it, yet ...


I listened to an evolutionary biologist explain to a class at the university that bears were evolving into anteaters. His proof for this theory was a skull of each, and some orating about similar lower jaw bones and teeth. Wasn't good enough for me, yet I was supposed to take his "authoritative" opinion/teaching at face value.

I wonder if the bears know they becoming anteaters ?
They aren't cutting down on their fish consumption, how many ants would it take to fill the belly of a bear ?
Do anteaters consume fish ?
How would they ever get fat enough on a diet of ants to survive the long winters nap ?
And this little piggy laughed all the way home.




They say it takes millions or years to evolve yet claim that they may never find a missing link because evolution may not be gradual, but in leaps. How convenient, "it's too slow of a process to prove," or "it happens in leaps, so we may never prove it."

hey a kid friendly gov site

Quote:Second, in Gould's theories, evolution may not always be
gradual, but may proceed in many discrete leaps, so that the chance of finding
transitional animals (missing links) may be low.

newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/biology/bio040.htm

A leap would be possible with some intervention I suppose



You would think that if man evolved from a primate, so long long ago, that by now in all our documented history and research, there would be some further signs of such in existing primates.
Where are the apes/chimpanzees/gorillas that have done some evolving, mastered the art of fire, made a clay bowl, scratched a design into a rock, something ?

[jack]

and of course faulty evidence doesn't help to alleviate my skepticism

Quote:National Geographic retracts boast of dinosaur-to-bird 'missing link'

By Lee Weeks

WASHINGTON (BP)--An independent group of scientists has described as unfounded National Geographic Society's report late last year of "a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds."

A panel of paleontologists and ornithologists released their findings April 6, confirming speculation by outside scientists that National Geographic Society's media blitz touting a feathered dinosaur fossil lacked independent scientific confirmation.

The panel was convened by National Geographic after a number of media reports, such as one in USA Today, questioned the supposed discovery.

Further examination by the scientists of the fossil has revealed that it is a composite of at least two different animals. The fossil was smuggled into the United States from China and was sold for $80,000 to the owner of a dinosaur museum in Monticello, Utah, before it eventually landed in the halls of the National Geographic Society in Washington.

While National Geographic Society attempts to restore its credibility in the wake of the dinosaur-bird fossil flap, scientists at two Baptist universities say the fiasco could have been avoided had standard scientific protocols been followed.

"Publishing the report in National Geographic before subjecting it to the scientific peer-review process showed very poor judgment," said David A. DeWitt, assistant professor of biology and associate director of creation studies at Liberty University, Lynchburg, Va. "In their zeal to provide evidence for their belief that dinosaurs gave rise to birds they short-circuited the scientific process."

Wayne Wofford, director of the Edward P. Hammons Center for Scientific Studies at Union University, Jackson, Tenn., said, "National Geographic will pay a heavy price for their over-zealousness. It will take them a long to time to re-establish the trust of the scientific community and the public."

In a six-page color spread, complete with artist's drawings, photographs and diagrams, National Geographic's November 1999 issue reported that the "Archaeoraptor," supposedly a 120-million-year-old bird-like creature with the tail of a meat-eating dinosaur, had been discovered in a fossil unearthed in the remote Liaoning Province of China.

The fossil had also been showcased before more than 100,000 people, the majority of them children, at the National Geographic's Explorers Hall in Washington between Oct. 15 and Jan. 21.

By late January, with the dinosaur-bird link controversy in the media, National Geographic promised to publish a correction in its March issue.

In March, National Geographic published a letter, of less than 90 words, written by Xu Xing, one of the scientists who originally examined the "Archaeoraptor," in the magazine's "Forum" section

In the letter, Xing writes of comparing the fossil to another "feathered dromaeosaur" and concluding, "Though I do not want to believe it, Archaeoraptor appears to be composed of a dromaeosaur tail and a bird body."

DeWitt and Wofford said National Geographic could have restored its credibility sooner by publishing the correction more prominently in the magazine in light of the hype it gave to the announcement last November of the alleged discovery.

"People who were looking for the retraction couldn't find it," DeWitt said. "A letter to the editor is not the usual way to handle an error of this magnitude."

National Geographic editor Bill Allen said the magazine plans to publish a story in the fall that looks at the whole sequence of events involving the fake fossil.

"I hope people are going to view what we do here in the overall context," Allen told the Associated Press, "so that the one aberration is not going to damage our reputation in the long run."

DeWitt said he hopes National Geographic and the scientific community at large has learned a lesson about flying off the handle with public announcements of discoveries before having them confirmed by independent researchers.

"It seems like National Geographic is being much more careful and rigorous in handling the retraction than they were in the initial report," DeWitt said. "Perhaps if they were as cautious from the beginning, they wouldn't have created such a mess."

But Wofford is careful to point out that the scientific process worked, "though belatedly so."

"It was scientists who raised the concerns about the validity of the fossil. ... The scientific community is for the most part a self-policing entity," Wofford said. "Maintenance of credibility is crucial for the whole community."

DeWitt noted he is concerned that the scientific community's predisposition toward evolution too often takes precedence over objective scientific research.

"Many scientists are so convinced that Darwinism is correct that they can't even see the plain evidence that contradicts it," DeWitt said. "Because they only look for evidence that supports the theory, they can be easily duped. The Archaeoraptor incident shows what can happen when scientists fail to consider alternative explanations."

DeWitt said the Archaeoraptor hoax will now be preserved in history along with a "growing list of evolution and fossil fakes" such as:

-- "Nebraska Man" -- In 1922, scientists heralded a fossilized tooth, reported to be 1 million years old, as the "missing link" in human evolution. The tooth was presented as evidence for evolution in the 1925 Scopes Trial. Later it was discovered that the fossil was that of pig's tooth.

-- "Piltdown Man" -- For nearly 50 years scientists believed they had discovered evolution's missing link in a portion of a human skull that had been pieced together with the jaw of an orangutan. Later it was learned that the teeth had been filed down to look more human-like.

-- "Haeckel's Embryos" -- Ernst Haeckel, a German developmental biologist, drew pictures of embryos of a fish, frog, chicken, pig and human to illustrate evolutionary history common to all of these species. Despite the revelation that the drawings of the various species had been deceptively altered, the drawings may still be found in biology textbooks today.

-- "Peppered Moth" -- In England, scientists' conclusions that darker-colored moths perched on tree trunks were better camouflaged from predatory birds than lighter colored moths was dispelled when it was revealed that photographs of the moths had been staged because the moths do not rest on tree trunks.

"One has to wonder how many other fossils are also composites of different animals," DeWitt said. "Since these professional scientists were so easily fooled, perhaps we should question how extensive such fossil mishaps are. They are probably more common than we think."

[JazzRoc]

Quote:I'm not saying we as a species, as all species haven't adapted to our surroundings, we have. Adaption is evolving without completely changing the genetic code. Perhaps that explains colors, languages, etc. I fall short of saying we have evolved because had we evolved we would not have spent this much time trying to figure out how to kill, master, enslave, and destroy everything our world and even our very presence depend upon.

A continual adaptation to changing surroundings leads to a species eventually not interbreeding with its "parent" species, and thus a NEW SPECIES.

Quote:Creation is a different topic than Evolution. Example: For thousands of years Gunieas and Poultry have cross bred, sometimes with success. The offspring is and always have been sterile. Sake as with what is called Muscovey Ducks (actually South American Tree Goose) can breed with wjat are called domestic or land ducks. All the offspring are sterile. They breed, lay eggs, but nothing happens, no offspring. They are not like KINDS. In a lab scientist have inserted human DNA in rice, Firefly in corn and all kinds of abberations. In nature that doesn't happen. That is because they are not like KINDS.

"KINDS" is a meaningless term. Even "species", as a term, is merely a human classification. A new species is simply that which will not interbreed with some other species.

Quote:For species to die JazzRoc so that another can come along is what we haven't evolved, we've digressed.

New species arise from existing species. The "parent" species quite often coexist with their children species.

Quote:Nowhere in the laws of nature does it even come close to saying that. In nature, we are all interconnected and dependant upon each other. That doesn't mean that predators don't depend upon eating prey but rather if the prey no longer exists, the predator will not either. The prey would overbreed if not eaten and eventually they would die. There is a balance to the world and religion has nothing to do with if that exists.

Predators are always characteristically opportunistic. They always have more than one prey, and more than than one mode of predation. They may well "tune in" their physical characteristics to a particular prey, but NEVER at the expense of their opportunism. They are hunters. NOT diers!

Life on Earth, from its inception, has probably always expanded rapidly to fill its niche, suffered a Malthusian near-extinction from overpopulation and disease, generated a new predator (and thus another niche), achieved a balance, suffered a climate change, evolved to fit the new circumstances, with more niches, suffered new predators, etc., etc., ad infinitum. A "natural" balance will always occur. But such things are the mathematical consequences of natural events writ large on our massive planet. It's true that religion has nothing to do with any of this. Religion is politics, and has NEVER had anything to do with TRUTH.

Quote:Animals breed by selection, us included. This however doesn't produce a different animal or even a better animal.

It ALWAYS produces a different animal. The selection is natural, which is as opposite to random as you can get. However, if there is little selection pressure, selection may well be random, and the mutations may well appear to cycle.

[JazzRoc]

Quote:If that were the case everything alive today would be immortal, or damn near it.

A false argument. Immortality would stop evolution dead.

Quote:Divine intervention or just by pure shit house luck, human shouldn't even be here, I chose the first, but that is a choice we can all freely make.

Another false argument. Just under 4 billion years - it looks like evolution could have done the job in a third of the time - easy.

Quote:Many animals now extinct have lived in groups, but they are gone.

Beside the point. Whether volcanic or asteroid extinction events, or gross climate change or continental drift and formation, being grouped or not is generally immaterial.

Quote:And just how far have we advanced? Internet and radio. TV and planes. None of what we have are needed. The web keeps us complacent and separated from actual human contact with family and friends. Radio and TV to keep our minds from all the wonders in the world or actually being dependent upon someone else for food and clothing, usually not giving a damn how they live or are treated. Planes and tanks and cars. When we lived in a smaller world how simple it was and how we cherished the thoughts of another. We made due with what nature offered and befriended strangers. No, I'd say we have de-evolved.

Funny, what happened to the Cro-magnons? Vlad the Impaler? The Roman Circuses? The Spanish Inquision? Giordano Bruno?

Quote:Our bodies are no stronger than they once were. Our bodies and minds last even less that they once did.

The Olympics...

Quote:Improvements? We think because we debate that makes us smarter. Lions do the same before a hunt. It makes us smarter because we wonder what our purpose is in life? The animals seem to already have theirs figured out. Hint JazzRoc, we're not the only animal with a thumb or the capabilites to use it. Learn your animals please.

I don't remember arguing that the thumb made the difference! Certainly, it was my intention to say that it was a part of the package, which included a predator's mindset, and the power of speech, language, and pattern recognition, applied to foresight.

Quote:I don't buy evolution but rather adaptation. Animals adapt to their surroundings over time but since we've constantly worked our smart brains to enslave, destroy, and abuse, will we or anything else be able to adapt to what our world is becoming?

Animals (and plants as well!) adapt to their surroundings, true. But over geological time, their surroundings change, and they change with their surroundings. If their surroundings CHANGE COMPLETELY, then so will they.

We can intitate rapid changes to our environment, so rapid as to extinguish species, true, but if we keep that up Nature will surely sort us out, and continue WITHOUT US, and unabated. Living beings, being subject to constant mutation and natural selection, adapt and SURVIVE.

500,000 years from now, another ape will stand erect, shed its fur, and wonder what its purpose is in life...

You really need to shed this depressingly parochial and atavistic view of existence.

Life is the most beautiful thing in the Universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee_genome_project

[---]

Quote:500,000 years from now, another ape will stand erect, shed its fur, and wonder what its purpose is in life...

That's entirely possible and perhaps their designation will be that of gardeners, or perhaps, god forbid, that of sophisticated livestock..

Quote:The results of the chimpanzee genome project suggest that when ancestral chromosomes 2A and 2B fused to produce human chromosome 2, no genes were lost from the fused ends of 2A and 2B. At the site of fusion, there is approximately 150,000 base pairs of sequence not found in chimpanzee chromosomes 2A and 2B.

We're back to the case of the magically 'fusing' chromosomes B)