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.
Your trite cliches are so precious.
So tell me, "what would Jesus think" about you and your friends "beating people over the head with Darwin's religion"?
BTW - FYI: If anyone could "do what Jesus would do", there'd have been no need for Jesus to do what he already DID, so if you're wearing one of those cute little bracelets, even if it makes you feel better, take it off.
Hating people that know science is wrong. I will pray for you.
You have a barrel full of self-righteous, trite leftist cliches, don't you? Hahaha
Just hope that you really do know science! If God did create the world as stated in the Bible, then the act was supernatural! We would not know the constraints imposed on creation. Naturalistic assumptions would be lead to an invalid science! Should we not embrace a science that is open-minded about the creation process? Should we only allow naturalistic assumptions? Only allowing a philosophical framework based on naturalism limits science!
Thanks for the ping. I seem to be late to the party.
"A lot of people looked the other way," he said.
Because he got the answers they liked.
You better tell that to the multiverse guys, they think they're doing science.
I agree. It is not easy to tell the difference between a skull c. 200 years old and a skull purported to be 20,000 years old. If a reputable scientist says so, well, that makes it even more convincing. We must be forgiving in this case, however, as the individual involved here does not practice science. He is simply a devotee to a faddish philosophy that has engulfed the public school system despite its lack of scientific merit.
I didn't know praying for someone was a "trite leftist cliche". Perhaps you are not what you represent yourself to be.
"He is simply a devotee to a faddish philosophy that has engulfed the public school system despite its lack of scientific merit."
This means he was a creationist.
"Just hope that you really do know science! If God did create the world as stated in the Bible, then the act was supernatural! We would not know the constraints imposed on creation. Naturalistic assumptions would be lead to an invalid science! Should we not embrace a science that is open-minded about the creation process? Should we only allow naturalistic assumptions? Only allowing a philosophical framework based on naturalism limits science!"
Not only do I know the science, I know the Bible. I know that the creationist interpretation of the Bible is silly. It will never be true, because it makes no sense.
There is no contradiction between evolution science and the Bible, because the Bible is not simplistic and evolution says nothing about creation of life.
Of course you knew that and are just posturing for continuing the creationist scam.
Hey!
Agnostic. --and the cat owns me.
this goes on all the time...an academic subsequently has to "revise" or "recreate" his theories....this guy pissed in the punch bowl somehow...
Say What? I don't think so.
Curious, do you know why?
What seems to get left out of all of this is that angels mated with women and their offspring was some kind of hybrid. The human population was becoming corrupted on a large scale with these angel genes and this in large part is why mankind except Noah and his family were destroyed. Hybrids could not ultimately be saved as when Christ came he became a propitiation for mankind not angel or man- angelkind. Also it appears that demons tried to imitate what the angel had done. The angels were judged and locked up in chains of darkness. It seems that the giants that were around at the time of King David may have been demon (fallen angel) and man hybrids. Now just how do all you evolutionist think that all these corrupted gene pools might show up in fossil record? Wouldn't you automatically call them another evolutionary link because you were not aware of things that went on that were out of the realm of your knowledge?
ANYTHING 'designed' implies intelligence; of some kind or another.
I'm confused.
What am I 'making' up?
I'm merely cutting and pasting Scripture. Any 'interpretation' must be going on in YOUR mind.
"We are a nation that is unenlightened because of religion. I do believe that. I think that religion stops people from thinking. I
think it justifies crazies. I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological
disorder. If you look at it logically, it's something that was drilled into your head when you were a small child. It certainly was
drilled into mine at that age. And you really can't be responsible when you are a kid for what adults put into your head."
The former host of "Politically Incorrect" said the lack of enlightenment of so many Americans means the nation actually has more
in common with its enemies than one might think.
Said Maher: "When you look at beliefs in such things as, do you go to heaven, is there a devil, we have more in common with Turkey and Iran and Syria than we do with European nations and Canada and nations that, yes, I would consider more enlightened than us."
Maher explained that he was not singling out evangelicals, but was targeting all "religious" people.
"I think the vote in Missouri [rejecting same-sex marriage] and a lot of other states is because people are religious," Maher said. "They don't have to be evangelical, but they're religious. They believe in religion, which as ? I think it was Jesse Ventura who had that quote about religion is a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers."
The television host told Scarborough he was convinced evangelicals' influence will wane.
Said Maher: "When people say to me, 'You hate America,' I don't hate America. I love America. I am just embarrassed that it has been taken over by people like evangelicals, by people who do not believe in science and rationality. It is the 21st century. And I will tell you, my friend. The future does not belong to the evangelicals. The future does not belong to religion."
Later in the interview, Maher returned to the childhood-religion theme, comparing fairy tales to Bible stories:
"When you were a kid and they were telling you whatever you believe in religion, do you think if they had switched the fairy tales that the read to you in bed with the Bible, you would know the difference?
"Do you think if it was the fairy tale about a man who lived inside of a whale and it was religion that Jack built a beanstalk today, you would know the difference? Why do you believe in one fairy tale and not the other? Just because adults told you it was true and they scared you into believing it, at pain of death, at pain of burning in hell."
Par for the course. You get confused very easily, I've noticed. For example interpretation goes on in your mind too...
You are attempting (I think, correct me if I am wrong) to be posting Biblical justification of your belief in Jesus' omniscience. I see no such statements in the snippets you posted.
If you think those snippets definitively state Jesus' omniscience then in my opinion you are making up stuff that is not in the text.
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.