|
|
|
|
Where IS all that EVIDENCE?
Every letter to an editor, every newspaper column, and every broadcast commentary I have seen or heard since the Kansas Board of Education announced it’s decision regarding the teaching of evolution in science classes has referred to some huge amount of evidence supporting Darwin’s unproved and unprovable theory of evolution, one of the leftists most sacred of cows. They seem to believe that making a statement regarding the existence of evidence is the same as presenting evidence since they never bother to get specific. There’s a good reason for that: There is NO EVIDENCE, not one bit, that they can present. Many supporters of this sham science make reference to the fossil record to add weight to their arguments, insinuating that assertion is as good as evidence. The actual fact is the heralded fossil record has failed to produce even one genuine transitional creature which is a pretty good indication that people relying on the fossil record to support their belief in the theory of evolution don’t know what they talking about. Genuine is a key word here. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that those promoting the theory of macro evolution, when they can find no evidence to support their faith, which they have tried for over a century to masquerade as science, simply manufacture it. Here are a few examples taken from a well-documented book entitled Five Lies of the Century, a book by David Moore you really should read: Piltdown man -- When subjected to a test developed in 1950 that dated fossils, Piltdown turned out to be 1,000 years old rather than 500,000 years old as claimed by evolutionists. The bones had been treated with iron salts to make them look older and the teeth appeared to have been filed to enhance the "authenticity." Even thought proved to be a fraud, Piltdown is still included in the lore or evolution. Nebraska man -- A myth was concocted when someone fond a tooth in Nebraska in 1922. Examinations later proved the tooth came from an extinct pig. Peking man -- Based on the discovery of 30 skull fragments, four lower jaws and 147 teeth in a cave near Peking during the early 1900’s, Peking man was conjured up. Somehow, all the "evidence" mysteriously disappeared, yet Peking man is included in evolutionary "history." Neanderthal man -- Once touted as the missing link after being discovered in the Neander Valley, Germany, Neanderthal man has now been reclassified as a Homo Sapien (modern man). X-rays proved that arthritis caused him to walk in a stooped position. Many encyclopedias still refer to him as prehuman. Ramapithecus -- Based on the discovery of a jaw and a couple of teeth in 1932, Ramapithecus was established and presented as the missing link. Many highly-respected experts now say Ramapithecus is an orangutan. Australopithecus -- Current number one contender for missing link, Australopithecus, constructed from a few bone fragments and someone’s huge imagination, also is regarded by many experts as most likely being an orangutan. According to an article in World magazine a couple of years ago, drawings of Ernst Haeckel, a German biologist whose artwork has been used in high school and college science textbooks for more than a hundred years, have been demonstrated to be fake. According to the magazine article, an embryologist at St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London has proven that the drawings "were purposely faked to bolster the evolutionary argument." Michael Richardson said that "not only did Haeckel add or omit critical features to increase the appearance of similarity between species, he also obscured differences in scale to enhance the effect he wished to create." Self-proclaimed intellectuals, none of whom want to be confused by facts, continue to make monkeys of themselves by repeating the mantra of the Darwinists and ignoring the readily available evidence proving the bankruptcy of the theory of macro evolution. Anyone who disagrees with the self-anointed intellectual elite, those who prefer to think of themselves as cool, sophisticated and intellectually superior, is accused of believing the earth is flat and that babies are delivered by a stork. They would rather be cutesy than correct; acerbic rather than accurate; silly rather than sincere; humorous rather than honest. I don’t think that fits the definition of intellectual. |
|
Send mail to
DrGary777@aol.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
