Posted on 11/13/2005 6:07:54 AM PST by NYer
One fake from 1912.
... Nebraska Man...
One innocent misinterpretation from 1922 and caught almost at once.
... Ramapithecus...
Real species, no longer considered in the human lineage but still thought ancestral to orangutans.
... and Australopithecus.
Still the likeliest candidate of its time to carry the human lineage. Intergrades with chimp-like creatures (Sahelanthropus, for example) at the old end and the hominids at the young end of its fossil range.
...recognized as hoaxes or mistakes.
Is your post a hoax or a mistake?
its somewhat like a trainwreck. (you just can't help but look)
True and entertaining as heck too.
Thanks for making me laugh out loud at the worst pun I have heard in a long time.
And any way, the reason to even bring this up is that there is no magical proof machine that can be constructed to prove these statements (EVO,ID,stone soup,etc.), and so will rely on some Human to say otherwise.
Now you're being cruel. Are you picking on me because I don't want to claim a chimp as a relative?
Thanks for making me laugh out loud at the worst pun I have heard in a long time.
That one was pretty mild. I come up with some of the dumbest ones you'll ever hear. I often have to explain them too (because only I often have the stupidity to understand them). One of the worst was when I was talking to someone on here and we somehow got on the subject of Bill Clinton and fool's gold. I said that they ought to just throw the pyrite at his face. I got quite a few groans out of that one.
I don't want to claim a chimp as a relative?
My uncle Cheetah was a pretty nice guy you know:).
Please do not represent ID as being "faith-based," and we can all get along in a calmer atmosphere.
Of course. If everyone would just stop exposing the flaws, deceptions and misreprentations of ID, things would be so much more peaceful.
Moog, Troll, D+
I don't see you dealing with not having your facts straight. Did you get them from a Jack Chick comic?
I disagree with you. There is truth to both theories and both should be taught. If ID is as bogus as you say, it will be victorious in the end.
"Genus Homo" was meant. Of course, Australopithecus IS a hominid.
Hmm, adds nothing...yet non-sequitur...
Thank you for the nice term. I appreciate it. D+?????????????????--that's a little too high for it I think.
"One innocent misinterpretation from 1922 and caught almost at once."
The mistake of Nebraska Man was "caught" in 1927. It was a single tooth from a peccary (extinct pig).
They made an interesting use of it. They showed it at the Scopes "Monkey" trial in 1925 as irrefutable evidence of the animal ancestry of man. Since William Jennings Bryan was himself from the state of Nebraska, Osborn chided him about Nebraska man in the press:
"The earth spoke to Bryan from his own state of Nebraska. The Hesperopithecus tooth is like the still, small voice. It's sound is by no means easy to hear ----. This little tooth speaks volumes of truth, in that it affords evidence of mans descent from the ape".
Actually, the Scientific community today, is reacting to ID the way the Religious community reacted to a round earth eons ago.
And how many of them react to evolution today.
It was a single tooth from a peccary (extinct pig).
Peccaries are alive and well and actually aren't direct members of the pig family.
That Homo hablilis (D) skull is from a goa 'uld or a tokra operative I think.
No, they didn't. The intended presentation by the defense was objected and sustained.
And you're only dealing with what you got (generously) "right." Deal with what you got wrong. You most egregiously mischaracterize Australopithecus by lumping it with a fake from 1912, a misinterpretation from 1922, and something that was once thought a possible human ancestor but reconsidered after more data came in.
IS YOUR POST A FAKE OR A HOAX?
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.