You sound ignorant of the Piltdown evolution hoax foolishly and dishonestly promoted in American textbooks for more than 5 decades. Why not at least admit that was one clear example of a widespread accepted 'fact' of science that proved to be totally wrong? Admit that and I will mention other formerly accepted scientific 'facts' from the Scopes trial that have since been debunked.That's one fact lol. Was the trial only about the piltdown man? No? Keep going
You sound ignorant of the Piltdown evolution hoax foolishly and dishonestly promoted in American textbooks for more than 5 decades. Why not at least admit that was one clear example of a widespread accepted 'fact' of science that proved to be totally wrong? Admit that and I will mention other formerly accepted scientific 'facts' from the Scopes trial that have since been debunked.
I suppose you, like me, are ashamed of our schools for allowing the hoax to be accepted and included in science books for more than 50 years. Ironically, the Darwinian deceivers invented the Piltdown hoax just down the road in England after rejecting real fossils found in the Cattedown caves that upended existing evolution theory timelines. The Piltdown man was not real yet was widely touted. The Cattedown Man was real, older, and found among a great number of other fossils, yet was generally ignored by evolutionists who did not like what the Cattedown fossils obviously proved contrary to their earlier unproven theories.i just posted how it wasn't an accepted scientific fact.
god you post the dumbest things. lol
I suppose you, like me, am ashamed of our schools for allowing the hoax to be included in science books for more than 50 years.
I suppose you, like me, are ashamed of our schools for allowing the hoax to be accepted and included in science books for more than 50 years. Ironically, the Darwinian deceivers invented the Piltdown hoax just down the road in England after rejecting real fossils found in the Cattedown caves that upended existing evolution theory timelines. The Piltdown man was not real yet was widely touted. The Cattedown Man was real, older, and found among a great number of other fossils, yet was generally ignored by evolutionists who did not like what the Cattedown fossils obviously proved contrary to their earlier unproven theories.
yes, mistakes can be made. People aren't perfect. science isn't perfect.Henry Fairfield Osborn and the Tragic Legacy of Piltdown Man - Textbook History
Piltdown man’s dramatic entry into textbooks starting in the mid-1930s was a reactionary effort by Henry Fairfield Osborn to infiltrate the debate on human origins and freeze in place his favored ideas of human evolution and the necessity of eugenic management. The consequences were tragic. By...textbookhistory.org
AFTER THE FALL
Though it wouldn’t introduce Australopithecus until 1965, Modern Biology (Moon et al.) dropped any mention of Piltdown (or Cro-Magnon) with its 1947 revision. Exploring Biology (Smith), the second-most popular high school text dropped Piltdown (and introduced the modern synthesis) in 1949. And General Biology for College (Moment) de-indexed Piltdown (and introduced Australopithecus tranvallensis) in 1950.
In striking contrast, in the first edition of the college-level Biology (1950), a textbook that would go on to dominate that market, author Claude Villee, like Pauli the year before, provided a long description of Piltdown. And like Pauli, relied for reference on the influential, and extremely racist, Up from the Ape by Harvard anthropologist Earnest A. Hooton (1931). Hooton, according to Villee, believed Piltdown “to be closer to the direct evolutionary line leading to man than any fossil so far discovered” (Villee, 1950, p. 532).
The revelation that Piltdown was a hoax in November, 1953, proved to be an extinction event for two venerable textbook series, Elements of Biology (Dodge, Smallwood), first published as Biology in 1916, and Man and His Biological World (Jean et al., first published as Man and the Nature of His Biological World in 1934). Both were “old school,” to put it pleasantly, on the topics of race and eugenics. And both, unsurprisingly, were all-in on Piltdown.
Henry Fairfield Osborn and the Tragic Legacy of Piltdown Man - Textbook History
Piltdown man’s dramatic entry into textbooks starting in the mid-1930s was a reactionary effort by Henry Fairfield Osborn to infiltrate the debate on human origins and freeze in place his favored ideas of human evolution and the necessity of eugenic management. The consequences were tragic. By...textbookhistory.org
AFTER THE FALL
Though it wouldn’t introduce Australopithecus until 1965, Modern Biology (Moon et al.) dropped any mention of Piltdown (or Cro-Magnon) with its 1947 revision. Exploring Biology (Smith), the second-most popular high school text dropped Piltdown (and introduced the modern synthesis) in 1949. And General Biology for College (Moment) de-indexed Piltdown (and introduced Australopithecus tranvallensis) in 1950.
In striking contrast, in the first edition of the college-level Biology (1950), a textbook that would go on to dominate that market, author Claude Villee, like Pauli the year before, provided a long description of Piltdown. And like Pauli, relied for reference on the influential, and extremely racist, Up from the Ape by Harvard anthropologist Earnest A. Hooton (1931). Hooton, according to Villee, believed Piltdown “to be closer to the direct evolutionary line leading to man than any fossil so far discovered” (Villee, 1950, p. 532).
The revelation that Piltdown was a hoax in November, 1953, proved to be an extinction event for two venerable textbook series, Elements of Biology (Dodge, Smallwood), first published as Biology in 1916, and Man and His Biological World (Jean et al., first published as Man and the Nature of His Biological World in 1934). Both were “old school,” to put it pleasantly, on the topics of race and eugenics. And both, unsurprisingly, were all-in on Piltdown.
Evolution is a theory people accept for different reasons even though the theory is crippled with multiple scientific inaccuracies and unproven assumptions. Here are some pertinent points:yes, mistakes can be made. People aren't perfect. science isn't perfect.
your obsession with this one thing is curious. evolution wasn't built upon this one thing. Evolution was and still is the accepted scientific theory, regardless of your obession.
So that's 2.Evolution is a theory people accept for different reasons even though the theory is crippled with multiple scientific inaccuracies and unproven assumptions. Here are some pertinent points:
Vestigial Organs—Evidence for Evolution? | Answers in Genesis
Next on the list of debunked formerly accepted scientific 'facts' mentioned in the various document submissions in the Scopes trial is that of vestigial organs. reputable modern scientists put no value whatsoever in speculations and suppositions about vestigial organs. But 100 or more years ago the issue of vestigial organs was a commonly accepted fact.
The List of “Vestigial Organs” Grows
In 1893 the German anatomist Robert Wiedersheim expanded Darwin’s list of “useless organs” to 86. Listed among Wiedersheim’s “vestigial” organs were such organs as the parathyroid, pineal and pituitary glands, as well as the thymus, tonsils, adenoids, appendix, third molars, and valves in veins.1 All of these organs have been subsequently shown to have useful functions and indeed some have functions essential for life.
Wiedersheim’s vestigial organs were presented as one of the so-called “proofs” of evolution in the famous Scopes “Monkey Trial” of 1925. Horatio Hackett Newman, a zoologist from the University of Chicago, stated on the witness stand that “there are, according to Robert Wiedersheim, no less than 180 [sic] vestigial structures in the human body, sufficient to make a man a veritable walking museum of antiquities.”2
Of interesting note, Horatio Newman misquoted Wiedersheim in the Scopes Trial submittals, falsely claiming Wiedersheim had speculated there were 180 vestigial organs in the human body when the truth was that Wiedersheim had only suggested there were 86 vestigial organs. Furthermore, when evolutionists realized the error, they went back and created a revised Wiedersheim estimation to match the new Scopes Trial number, rather than admit Newman had made a mistake.
That reminds me of several precincts in 2020 that reported more votes than there were registered voters, prompting embarrassed election officials to retroactively alter the books to give the impression that the numbers of voters had not been exceeded after all. Aren't leftists, evolutionists, and Democrats something?
Let me know when you can prove the number of voters exceeded the number of registered voters somewhere lolEvolution is a theory people accept for different reasons even though the theory is crippled with multiple scientific inaccuracies and unproven assumptions. Here are some pertinent points:
Vestigial Organs—Evidence for Evolution? | Answers in Genesis
Next on the list of debunked formerly accepted scientific 'facts' mentioned in the various document submissions in the Scopes trial is that of vestigial organs. reputable modern scientists put no value whatsoever in speculations and suppositions about vestigial organs. But 100 or more years ago the issue of vestigial organs was a commonly accepted fact.
The List of “Vestigial Organs” Grows
In 1893 the German anatomist Robert Wiedersheim expanded Darwin’s list of “useless organs” to 86. Listed among Wiedersheim’s “vestigial” organs were such organs as the parathyroid, pineal and pituitary glands, as well as the thymus, tonsils, adenoids, appendix, third molars, and valves in veins.1 All of these organs have been subsequently shown to have useful functions and indeed some have functions essential for life.
Wiedersheim’s vestigial organs were presented as one of the so-called “proofs” of evolution in the famous Scopes “Monkey Trial” of 1925. Horatio Hackett Newman, a zoologist from the University of Chicago, stated on the witness stand that “there are, according to Robert Wiedersheim, no less than 180 [sic] vestigial structures in the human body, sufficient to make a man a veritable walking museum of antiquities.”2
Of interesting note, Horatio Newman misquoted Wiedersheim in the Scopes Trial submittals, falsely claiming Wiedersheim had speculated there were 180 vestigial organs in the human body when the truth was that Wiedersheim had only suggested there were 86 vestigial organs. Furthermore, when evolutionists realized the error, they went back and created a revised Wiedersheim estimation to match the new Scopes Trial number, rather than admit Newman had made a mistake.
That reminds me of several precincts in 2020 that reported more votes than there were registered voters, prompting embarrassed election officials to retroactively alter the books to give the impression that the numbers of voters had not been exceeded after all. Aren't leftists, evolutionists, and Democrats something?
People repeat what they have been taught whether they can prove it or not. Evolutionists and secularists claim the earth is 4 billion years old, but that figure does not agree with several undisputed scientific facts. You talk about learning and improvements as though when all old commonly taught evolutionist ideas are debunked that is to be expected. Yes, erroneous ideas are not uncommonly rejected after having been accepted for many years, but that should cause serious thinkers to be ready to question all scientific theories that have not been proven beyond doubt.unlike religions which insist they are literally correct and unable to learn, science is smarter and can learn from its mistakes and improve over time.
there are still christians who believe the earth is 6000 years old. lol. they think the bible is an inerrant science textbook, and nothing can change their "minds" hahahahhha
I can prove early reports showed more votes cast than were registered and can prove the records were altered after the election, not before the election, to do away with that serious evidence of error.Let me know when you can prove the number of voters exceeded the number of registered voters somewhere lol
Aren't right wing morons something?
Prove fraud occurred. Go for itI can prove early reports showed more votes cast than were registered and can prove the records were altered after the election, not before the election, to do away with that serious evidence of error.
What undisputed facts? List themPeople repeat what they have been taught whether they can prove it or not. Evolutionists and secularists claim the earth is 4 billion years old, but that figure does not agree with several undisputed scientific facts. You talk about learning and improvements as though when all old commonly taught evolutionist ideas are debunked that is to be expected. Yes, erroneous ideas are not uncommonly rejected after having been accepted for many years, but that should cause serious thinkers to be ready to question all scientific theories that have not been proven beyond doubt.
Scientists never stop questioning.People repeat what they have been taught whether they can prove it or not. Evolutionists and secularists claim the earth is 4 billion years old, but that figure does not agree with several undisputed scientific facts. You talk about learning and improvements as though when all old commonly taught evolutionist ideas are debunked that is to be expected. Yes, erroneous ideas are not uncommonly rejected after having been accepted for many years, but that should cause serious thinkers to be ready to question all scientific theories that have not been proven beyond doubt.
