“ “The earth spoke to Bryan from his own state of Nebraska. The Hesperopithecus tooth is like the still, small voice. Its sound is by no means easy to hear... This little tooth speaks volumes of truth, in that it affords evidence of man’s descent from the ape."[18][19]

↑ http://www.detectingdesign.com/earlyman.html#Nebraska%20Man
↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i4/nebraska.asp

A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and atheist Ernst Haeckel. Noted evolutionist Stephen Gould wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of Natural History:

"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"[1]

↑ http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm

Ishilove: I came across this interesting article and I thought I should share it

"The theory of evolution is shot full of inconsistencies. Evolutionists have seized on many theories, within the overall theory of evolution, in an attempt to explain the origins of plants, animals, the heavens and the earth.

Ishilove:
Over and over, these “theorists” try to explain how life evolved from inanimate material into more complex life forms until it reached the pinnacle—human beings.

Ishilove:
Yet, as one geologist wrote, “It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as student…have been debunked” (Dr. DerekV. Ager, Dept. of Geology, Imperial College, London, The Nature of the Fossil Record, Proceedings of the Geological Assoc., Vol. 87, 1976, pp.1132-1133).

Ishilove:
Perhaps the biggest reason that so many theories within the overall theory of evolution collapse is because they contain terrible logic requiring great leaps in faith to believe. Here is one example of a “debunked” theory: “Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically toapes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’sclosest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’  ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative’” (Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution, Grand Rapids: BakerBook House, 1967).

thehomer: These sorts of posts just serve as embarrassments to smart religious people. It contains errors and is misleading that one wonders why you religious folks don't just read a little before performing your copypasta?



No that isn't what the theory of evolutions is supposed to do.



Actually, they don't try to explain what you're saying above. In fact, the sentence is wrong on multiple levels.



Why don't you actually post the debunking information rather than going for a fallacious appeal to authority?



Actually, humans are apes. What on earth is a blood precipitation test for determining the closeness of species?
Also, can you actually elaborate on these other tests like your milk chemistry, cholesterol and tear enzyme test?

You guys really need to put in the effort to understand what you're trying to criticize otherwise you just come across as willfully ignorant since you're online and seem interested in the topic at hand.

frosbel:

As usual you have gone off on a tangent without addressing the article,

thehomer:

The article didn't present any actually reasonable inconsistency.

By the way, have you responded to the questions you were looking for?

Ishilove:

"The theory of evolution is shot full of inconsistencies. Evolutionists have seized on many theories, within the overall theory of evolution, in an attempt to explain the origins of plants, animals, the heavens and the earth.

thehomer: No that isn't what the theory of evolutions is supposed to do.

Deep Sight:
 


And for this reason, the theory of evolution has no bearing on the origin of life - and thus no relevance to the question of the existence or non-existence of GOD.

Larry-Sun:
The tortoise could be some people's closest relative because of its greed and deception.

toba.:
i stand firm. atheism has similarities with christianity

2good:

Atheism is not thesame as evolution so you are confused here. Evolution is more of a scientific reasoning which is different from Atheism. Atheism simply says god does not exist and if he does, the theist should prove it.

A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and atheist Ernst Haeckel. Noted evolutionist Stephen Gould wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of Natural History:

2good:

Atheism is not thesame as evolution so you are confused here. Evolution is more of a scientific reasoning which is different from Atheism. Atheism simply says god does not exist and if he does, the theist should prove it.

toba.:
I dont think my post depicts atheism being evolution even though atheists tends to cling more to evolution as a strong basis for their belief in the existence of no deity.

Atheism it self has similarities with christianity and judging by the activities of atheists on this forum, this cant be argued too much

tidytim: A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and atheist Ernst Haeckel. Noted evolutionist Stephen Gould wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of Natural History

logicboy01:

lololol and what are those similarities?

toba.:
I dont think my post depicts atheism being evolution even though atheists tends to cling more to evolution as a strong basis for their belief in the existence of no deity.

Atheism it self has similarities with christianity and judging by the activities of atheists on this forum, this cant be argued too much

toba.:
ur mission on NL is to ensure atheism becomes popular and acceptable. true or false?

frosbel:

It does , admit you have no response to it , period !!

Ishilove:
He bestrides the NL Religion section like a demon on a mission

toba.:
ur mission on NL is to ensure atheism becomes popular and acceptable. true or false?

Ishilove:
He bestrides the NL Religion section like a demon on a mission

Deep Sight:
 


And for this reason, the theory of evolution has no bearing on the origin of life - and thus no relevance to the question of the existence or non-existence of GOD.

thehomer:

Actually, the theory of evolution counters certain Gods and acts that they were said to have done e.g making man out of sand.

frosbel:

Lol, Wow !!

thehomer:

Actually, the theory of evolution counters certain Gods and acts that they were said to have done e.g making man out of sand.

logicboy01:

Sharaap there!

real_Berni: @Ishilove,
good job, you finnally got the atheists defending, aaah!, they hate being exposed inteligibly,but love sitting on the fence only to realise that most of them are not even well informed in their belief or defence, rather they enjoy that you are the one defending.

Deep Sight:

But we are made of star dust. Scientific fact.