It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Find me one scientist in the past 60-70 years that has cited Piltdown Man as evidence of evolution.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by randyvs
And yet it also shows that most scientists are more interested in the truth than hoaxes. When it comes to evolution there have only been a handful of hoaxes and each one was outed by the very scientists whose research would benefit from it. If something like Piltdown Man disproves evolution then that must mean that Christianity is disproved by all the Holy Grails and Arks of the Covenant are out there. Researchers cannot even prove one of these as being legitimate. Yet if they could that would mean all the others are hoaxes and by your logic disproves the entire concept of Christianity.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
And yet it also shows that most scientists are more interested in the truth than hoaxes.
"...if you ask questions you’ll be working at McDonalds tomorrow”
“Through interviews with representatives from both sides of the debate, Stein found out that educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired in some cases for the fact that they believe there is evidence of “design” in nature, challenging the idea that life is a result of random chance, according to a news release.
In another case, Caroline Crocker, a biology teacher at George Mason University who was forced out of the university for briefly discussing problems with Darwinian Theory and for telling the students that some scientists believe there is evidence of intelligent design in the universe.
“If you just stand up and question Darwinism – that’s it – your career is over”
“Scientists are supposed to be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it may lead, no matter what the implications are. Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, it’s anti-science. Its anti-the whole concept of learning” said Stein in a news release.
“Scientists are not even allowed to think thoughts that involve an intelligent creator.”
Source
Originally posted by Murgatroid
reply to post by Xcalibur254
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Find me one scientist in the past 60-70 years that has cited Piltdown Man as evidence of evolution.
If I found 1000 scientists that cited Piltdown as evidence, would that convince you?
The bottom line is that there is no proof that will satisfy you so you will continue to believe whatever it is that you believe.
No one can convince you of something you are in denial about.
Are you really interested in the truth or are you only interested in supporting your existing belief system and denying what you do not WANT to be real?
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by solomons path
If they had any direct evidence for their claims they wouldn't even care to challenge Evolutionary Biology/Anthro . . . the evidence for the supernatural would stand on it's own merits.
Doe c doe and right back atchya.
How about you provide 1000 scientists that have cited Piltdown Man as evidence since the 1950s. Then we can see my reaction. Note: I'm asking for scientists that have used Piltdown Man as evidence for evolution. I could care less about the thousands of blogs out there by "Creation scientists" that use Piltdown Man as some kind of proof that evolution is wrong.
Are you really interested in the truth or are you only interested in supporting your existing belief system and denying what you do not WANT to be real?
Originally posted by solomons path
Not true . . . .
these science conspiracies make no sense...
"You can't wake someone who is pretending to be asleep." ~ Native American Proverb
Originally posted by Murgatroid
reply to post by solomons path
Originally posted by solomons path
Not true . . . .
I cited much evidence from reliable sources...
You cited NOTHING other than your opinion.
We ALL know what opinions amount to.
She was not let go for being an ID proponent . . . and was a poor teacher.
Free to Think is about one politically incorrect professor's foray into the academic world. Dr. Crocker, a widely published scientist with numerous peer reviewed publications, goes into detail about both what she taught at George Mason University and how she taught it. In the end, the University did not like her challenging dogmatic fundamentalist Darwinism.
What is really upsetting, documented by pages of photocopies of University documents, is how they ended her career. To be blunt, they unethically connived to censor her by very underhanded and unethical tactics, to say the least. To detail what they did here would cause one to lose credibility. You must read the original documents to comprehend what the University did to this excellent professor and how. B ook Review
The true story is told in Free to Think: until Crocker challenged evolution in the classroom, she was recognized as an outstanding teacher. At the very time Crocker was told by her Department Head that she would be disciplined for challenging Darwin, she received a performance review from her Provost that called her teaching "outstanding" as "evidenced by unusually high student rankings"! The Provost even praised her, saying, "This kind of teaching quality is essential for this vital educational program, and we're very grateful for your successful efforts."
Such statements hardly describe a teacher who would otherwise be expected to soon lose her job. Yet Crocker did subsequently lose her job, and we know exactly why. As Crocker documents in her book, her administrators didn't want her challenging Darwin.
Caroline Crocker's Story of Discrimination