Science has to revise its view of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 B.C.

Due to one anthropologist grossly incorrectly carbon dating fossils that he found. Reiner Protsch von Zieten who is credited with showing that Neanderthal man once lived in Northern Europe was found by a German universtiy panel to have fabricated data and plagiarized the work of his colleages.

It appears that Protsch incorrectly dated fossils so that he could appear as if he has made monumental discoveries when in fact his finds were nothing important.



Link

Quote///
The scientific fossil evidence for the "evolution of man" consists of: Neanderthal Man (many specimens);
Peking Man (several skulls);
the "men" called Java, Heidelberg, Piltdown (until 20 years ago), and the recent finds in Africa: all extremely fragmentary; and a few other fragments. The total fossil evidence for the "evolution of man" could be contained in a box the size of a small coffin, and it is from widely separated parts of the earth, with no reliable indication of even relative (much less "absolute") age, and with no indication whatever of how these different "men" were connected with each other, whether by descent or kinship.

Further, one of these "evolutionary ancestors of man," "Piltdown Man," was discovered 20 years ago to have been a deliberate fraud.
Now it is an interesting fact that Teilhard de Chardin was one of the "discoverers" of "Piltdown Man"-a fact which you will not find in most textbooks or in biographies of him. He "discovered" the canine tooth of this fabricated creature-a tooth which had already been dyed with the intent to cause deception regarding its age when he found it!


Genesis and Early Man
The Orthodox Patristic Understanding

An article entitled The Eternal Will was printed in The Christian Activist Volume 11, Fall/Winter 1997.
It was a lecture given by Dr. Alexander Kalomiros on evolution vs. creationism and his interpretation of the traditional teachings by the Fathers of the Orthodox Church about Genesis.
This is a response to Dr. Kalomiros by Fr. Seraphim Rose. It has been excerpted for length by Frank Schaeffer.

www.orthodoxinfo.com...

IX
helen

Here's a little non-sensational information on the story.



Apparently Protsch was a dipstick and no one believed him anyways.

EDIT:


Oh, Snap!

Zip

[edit on 6/29/2005 by Zipdot]

Sorry to double post, and especially with so few comments on my quotes, but I really think this speaks for itself.



This came also from the URL I referenced above.

Zip

There's several factual errors that should be addressed.



Neanderthal isn't a direct ancestor of ours. It hasn't been considered part of the homo sapiens line for about 20 years.
www.acube.org...


No such creature. There had tentatively been a specimin labeled that, but it was later found (better measurement) to be homo erectus. The site is still known as "Peking Man Site", however.
Link here


aka Homo erectus... same bunch as "Peking Man"


Not part of the human line


Your source is about 60 years out of date, there. Current investigations report that the fraud was perpetrated by by a Christian in order to prove the Flood and was debunked by scientists.



This sounds suspiciously like something from a Jack Chick tract. In fact, we have over 40 Neanderthal individuals and a good number of the others you mentioned -- not to mention all the homo sapiens skeletons as well.


...terribly, terribly out of date. We've found family groups, in fact.


50 years ago (1953). Check the dates.


It is, however, mentioned in every site that debunks the Piltdown man.

Now, since this document attacks scientists, let's turn the coin around and take a little closer look at something that's IGNORED by this writer:

The Piltdown hoaxer, de Chardin was a Christian.
www.crosscurrents.org...


With more than one fabricated fosssil, in fact, this Christian set out to deceive the scientific community. His hoax was uncovered within 30 years of its creation. This is not the first time that Christians have attempted to hoax scientists... the Paluxy man track is another of those where the perpetrator finally admitted fraud.


Rose needs to check his scholarship and his facts.



Edit: just shortened a link

[edit on 29-6-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]

This means that his work has to be re-examined, and scientist's, as usual, have to be careful with what results they accept and which they rigourously test.

Thankfully, science, as a methodology, has built in methods to deal with this sort of thing.

The 'recent finds in africa' are a large number of specimins. The fossil evidence for man's orgins is quite a bit more than the one's listed.

Also, this new information, it relates to Neanderthal in Northern Europe, not the existence of Neanderthal, just neadnerthal in part of one part of Europe.


They are not all extremely fragmentary.


This makes it sound like there's just enough for one individual or a little more, which is completely untrue.

Here is a good page that has lots of examples of the fossil evidence for the origings of man.
This is completely untrue.

Yes, so why was it listed? Is that quote above from someone from way back before anyone knew that piltdown was a fraud?

Wait, 20 years? The skulls were discovered over several years starting in 1912, the fraud was finally discovered in 1953. Its been known to be a fraud for well over half a century.


Yes, the materials were dyed and scratched and mocked up too look like extremely ancient fossils and obscur the age.

Teilhard was not one of the 'discovers' really, the first skulls were found by Charles Dawson in 1912, who contacted Teilhard and others to look for more. Teilhard didn't find the canine until 1913.

Here's a page about the issue.


What did you find most convincing about that essay?