Posted on 02/19/2005 7:36:30 AM PST by Woodworker
Panel says professor of human origins made up data, plagiarized works
A flamboyant anthropology professor, whose work had been cited as evidence Neanderthal man once lived in Northern Europe, has resigned after a German university panel ruled he fabricated data and plagiarized the works of his colleagues. Reiner Protsch von Zieten, a Frankfurt university panel ruled, lied about the age of human skulls, dating them tens of thousands of years old, even though they were much younger, reports Deutsche Welle. "The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years," the university said of the widely recognized expert in carbon data in a prepared statement.
Protsch's work first came under suspicion last year during a routine investigation of German prehistoric remains by two other anthropologists. "We had decided to subject many of these finds to modern techniques to check their authenticity so we sent them to Oxford [University] for testing," one of the researchers told The Sunday Telegraph. "It was a routine examination and in no way an attempt to discredit Prof. von Zieten." In their report, they called Protsch's 30 years of work a "dating disaster."
Among their findings was an age of only 3,300 years for the female "Bischof-Speyer" skeleton, found with unusually good teeth in Northern Germany, that Protsch dated to 21,300 years. Another dating error was identified for a skull found near Paderborn, Germany, that Protsch dated at 27,400 years old. It was believed to be the oldest human remain found in the region until the Oxford investigations indicated it belonged to an elderly man who died in 1750. The Herne anthropological museum, which owned the Paderborn skull, did its own tests following the unsettling results. "We had the skull cut open and it still smelt," said the museum's director. "We are naturally very disappointed."
Protsch, known for his love of Cuban cigars and Porsches, did not comment on the commission's findings, but in January he told the Frankfurter Neue Presse, "This was a court of inquisition. They don't have a single piece of hard evidence against me." The fallout from Protsch's false dating of northern European bone finds is only beginning.
Chris Stringer, a Stone Age specialist and head of human origins at London's Natural History Museum, said: "What was considered a major piece of evidence showing that the Neanderthals once lived in northern Europe has fallen by the wayside. We are having to rewrite prehistory." "Anthropology now has to revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 B.C.," added Thomas Terberger, an archaeologist at the University of Greifswald. Frankfurt University's president, Rudolf Steinberg, apologized for the university's failure to curb Protsch's misconduct for decades. "A lot of people looked the other way," he said.
Fraud Ping
Not everyone is as gullible as you seem to believe.
You got something against either of those?
And what possible relevance has it to the subject at hand, which is the absolute dishonesty with which your side approaches this material?
In any case, "changing the subject" and "ad hominem" noted.
Seems that way.
Alas, poor Bruno ...
I'm not convinced of that after watching most of the atheists and evolutionists here kiss the feet of a handful of scientists who post here over the past few years; they believe everything they say! To me, that's a very dangerous thing, especially when the whole reason for starting this thread was because a very "respected and published" scientist was caught LYING, CHEATING, and generally being a bad guy. And what of his textbooks that are still in circulation in our major universities and institutions?
Have you noticed that the most vocal scientists here are atheists? Have you noticed that the evo's hang on their every word and run with anything they say? It's sad, really, when one chooses to let someone else do the thinking for them.
(Conservative and Biblical Literalist are not synonymous)
Depends on the meaning of 'Biblical Literalist'.
Not at all. It is a joke that goes back quite some time now between me and a couple of the others. Not a shot at you personally.
A lie, but even if true, it has no bearing on the evidence they present.
"? Have you noticed that the evo's hang on their every word and run with anything they say?"
I've noticed as well that they can back up what they say with evidence, evidence that is not so easily debunked as that which YOU fall before with outstretched arms. I've also noted that, if shown to be in error, they correct the mistakes, unlike the creationists who refuse to do so, and repeat the errors.
"It's sad, really, when one chooses to let someone else do the thinking for them."
Like you with the discredited creationist "scientists" you mark out to so willingly? Like you with the posters who are repeatedly shown to be liars?
What a joke.
Ha ha. I'll be sure to laugh about it when I get to the Middle East this Summer.
Not all those who believe in creation deny carbon dating methods, or believe the world is 10,000 years old.
Blzbba: "Applying the creationoid standard to Christianity means that every digraced pervert priest, every adulterating, money-laundering televangelist, and every action of fringe Christian cults only mean that Christianity is itself a farce.
RB: "Umm, no, Because Christians have a standard to follow, the Bible."
Exactly. The actions of a few do NOT discredit the truth of the religion itself. Similarly, the actions of this German 'scientist' (hardly an appropriate term for him, given his complete disregard to scientific method) do NOT discredit the other proven aspects of evolution.
"The Creationist is one who believes it was God and God alone. Someone who calls himself a Creationist and believes evolution happened across phylum boundries either doesnt understnd or agree with all of evolution or doesnt understnad or agreee with what the Bible teaches."
Or perhaps they don't take the Bible literally? I don't know - I'm not a Creationist.
Depends on the meaning of 'Biblical Literalist'.
And the meaning of 'Conservative'.
And the meaning of 'and'.
That's the thing about sentences. They tend to depend on the meanings of words in them. 8))
No, I haven't.
The very obviously pasted-in "Atheists for Darwin" sign throws the entire credibility of that image into question.
Do they have any other lies which are NOT oft-repeated? It seems that "oft-repeated lies" are the entire basis for creationist belief nowadays.
I understand that he's going to be too busy working on Global Warming. If only that idiot Bush would listen to him!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.