Sunday, March 25, 2007

Fabricated Evidence of Evolution at Balboa Park's Museum of Man

While on vacation in San Diego last week Roxy and I visited Balboa Park and some of the museums inside it including the Museum of Man and the Museum of Natural History. In the Museum of Man on display were several sculptured replicas of fossils, most of which I had read about on Wikipedia or other places. There were also several man-ape-like models on display. Whenever I look at this stuff I wonder how much of this is real and how much is conjecture. Obviously the amount of hair placed on models is in the conjecture catagory and is a little humorous, but how much else is?

One would think that sculptured replicas of fossils would have no fabrication but I didn't find this to be the case. For example, I knew that the Java Man find consisted of a skullcap, three teeth and a femur -- and since the femur was found 50 feet away from the skull its a leap of faith to conclude that these bones belonged to the same animal or species. When I looked at the replica of Java Man's fossilized bones there were more bones shown than were actually found. The reconstruction included six teeth and several bones were added possibly to connect the teeth to the skullcap.

Educational Note: The head has 29 bones; 22 of these bones form the exterior of the head, 6 are small ear bones and the last is the hyoid bone used for speech. A skullcap consists of three of these bones: the frontal bone, the parietal bone, and the occipital bone.

The question running through my mind is why are there six teeth in this sculptued replica instead of three? I know it's a small thing but why did they add more teeth? And why did they add more bones (not such a small thing)? If they want to connect the teeth to the skullcap I think it would have been more informative to have the replicated bones a slightly different color from the fabricated bones and to say so. Instead they present a consideral amount of fabrication as actual.

So then the question arises: how much of the museum is fabricated and how much is actual? I am not a paleontologist but I noticed quite a bit more fabrication -- like the Peking Man fossil replica which was right next to Java Man. There was no mention of the history of Peking Man fossils. (If you click the link to the Wikipedia artical on Peking Man note that they show a picture of a complete skull fabricated from a skullcap which was allegedly lost at sea). I was beginning to wonder if I would find the fraudulant Piltdown Man on display but it wasn't there.

I find it hypocritical that evolutionists refer the theory of intelligent design as psuedoscience. Maybe it is -- but no more so than the theory of evolution.

9 Comments:

At 6:17 AM, November 30, 2007, Blogger Doppelganger said...

I always get a kick out of seeing a computer programmer/engineer/non-scientist yammer on about how bad the science of evolution is, as if they have any clue. It appears that you get your information on evolution from primarily creationist sources, which is a bad, stupid thing to do in the first place. Take your claims regarding "the Java man":


"For example, I knew that the Java Man find consisted of a skullcap, three teeth and a femur -- and since the femur was found 50 feet away from the skull its a leap of faith to conclude that these bones belonged to the same animal or species. When I looked at the replica of Java Man's fossilized bones there were more bones shown than were actually found. The reconstruction included six teeth and several bones were added possibly to connect the teeth to the skullcap."

First, it is somewhat insulting to think that a physical anthropologist would not be able to infer body shapes, etc., from incomplete fossil remains. As an anatomist, I know that a great deal of information can be gleaned form tiny bits of bone, prioviding you know what to look for. Tell me, Intelligent Designer, how much experience do YOU have examing bones and fossils? How much training and experience do YOU have in anatomy and physiology such tha tyou can deliver these denigrations and dismissals?

Second, your creationists handlers have, as usual, lied to you. Which is odd, since you mention using Wikipedia. Surley, you looked up Javan Man on Wikipedia?

"A second, more complete specimen was later discovered in the village of Sangiran, Central Java, 18km to the north of Solo."

Ah, so it wasn't just a skullcap, femur, and some teeth.

Furthermore, looking at the skullcap, again if one knows anatomy, there are only so many forms that the skull could have taken. The shape, thickness, etc. of the bones are actualy quite informative, and while certainly some inferrence form similar specimens had to be employed, to dismiss it all as 'fraud' and the like is irresponsible and insulting, especially comeing from someone with no background whatsoever in the field.

There is much more in error with your claims, but a comments section is not the place to deal with them all. I will do so later at my own blog.

 
At 7:00 PM, November 30, 2007, Blogger Intelligent Designer said...

Hi Doppelganger,

Thanks for commenting on my blog. I don't have time to respond to all your points so I will focus on what was found in wikipedia. But before I do I want to confess that I am guilty of reading creationist literature some 30+ years ago when I was a Christian in high school. The high school actually let me design my own independent study course and I choose study creationists arguments against evolution. I can't believe how open minded they were back then. But that was then. I am not a Christian now and my primary sources of information aren't creationists.

I found your quote from Wikipedia interesting. I didn't remember the part about a "more complete" specimen being there. How could I have missed that? I could swear the second specimen only consisted of a skull cap. So I checked to see if the webpage had been revised since then and to my amazement it turns out that the page on Java Man has been modified approximately 80 times between the time that I posted my blog and the time that you commented on it. When I quoted Wikipedia it said the second specimen (found by Koenigswald in 1936) consisted only of a skullcap. You can verify this by reading the revision history. So which it true? Did Koeigswald find a skullcap or something more complete?

It's a little disturbing that the Wikipedia page currently sites the activist website http://www.talkorigins.org as a reference. I am also surprised that an associate professor of biology like you would site it too. Are you really an associate professor of biology or did you just make that up on your blog? If you want to be a full professor maybe you should site more credible information sources and improve your spelling and grammar (lol). Well I guess it was kind of ad hominem of me to say that but I am just trying to coax you into doing a little more research.

Finally, I would like to point out that "Java Man" refers to the fossils found by Dubois in 1891 and that is what the Museum of Man claimed to represent. It did not claim that the exhibit represented Sangiran 2, 4 or 17.

 
At 1:06 PM, December 01, 2007, Blogger Doppelganger said...

First, I cited it (talkorigins)because it came up on a quick google search, and as you listed Wikipedia as your only reference , I did not think any in-depth analysis was warranted.

Second, while talkorigins may be an 'activist' site, the articles there at least provde accurate citations to primary literature and they are generally written by people with relevant and legitimate credentials, unlike most creationist literature.

Again, a trained paleontologist or anthropologist has a bit more experience in gleaning information from fossils than would a software engineer.
Wouldn't you agree?

Of course, to think that any aspect of evolution rests on a single fossil is ludicrous.

 
At 3:38 PM, December 01, 2007, Blogger Doppelganger said...

Tell me, Intelligent Designer, how much experience do YOU have examing bones and fossils? How much training and experience do YOU have in anatomy and physiology such tha tyou can deliver these denigrations and dismissals?


Are you really a computer software engineer, or did you just make that up?

 
At 6:52 PM, December 01, 2007, Blogger Intelligent Designer said...

I almost didn’t accept your comments above because they don’t contain any factual information relating to the topic of this webpage. I guess that is partly my fault because I countered your ad holmium attack with one of my own and got you all riled up. So let’s deal with facts relating to the topic of the original post … What did the “more complete” specimen found by Koenigswald in 1936 consist of?

 
At 11:42 AM, December 04, 2007, Blogger Intelligent Designer said...

I gave Doppelganger two chances to come clean and present some facts but he wouldn’t do it. So I will do it for him. The “more complete” specimen referred to in Wikipedia was Sangiran 2 which is just another skull cap. Doppelganger probably knew this because the information was on the link he supplied to support his argument (scroll down to the second image). But instead of providing specific information he chose to be vague and leave it to the readers’ imagination just what the “more complete” specimen was.

I reviewed Doppelgangers blog and his argumentation style is to question the credentials of his opponent and imply that they are stupid. He presents very few facts. To that I say, if you can’t be intellectually honest, it doesn’t matter what your credentials are.

Doppelganger is Dr. Scott Page, Associate Professor of Biology at Norwich University.

 
At 9:00 PM, December 06, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I always find it very interesting how the Doppleganger's of the world are so dogmatic about evolution. It takes a stupid person to fall for false 'science' as being factual, when the facts simply don't add up. Doppleganger is a fool. He got his little degree that was earned by agreeing with other indoctrinated atheist and all the sudden common sense is thrown out the door. You have eye's and ears. Do you actually believe physics, as Dawkins said, did it all? Physics is WORKS!! It had to be CREATED! No scientist worth his salt would deny that FACT! Dopple is a typical darn scared fool that has a worthless degree as Creation is restored back to it's rightful place. The blogger said he use to be a Christian. Why aren't you now?? A coward? You let these self-righteous atheist humanist deceive you from salvation!! You said yourself, how things were added to the fossils. Then the arrogant Dopple said, don't you think they know what would go there?? Absolutely not. The assumption those fellows make, have over time, been proven WRONG WRONG WRONG! I am sick and tire of the sweet Christian approach to these jackasses......Evolutionist. If they were so damn sure about what they KNEW.......It would be all over the world media to end the dispute, once and for all. Stepthen Jay Gould and Estridge manufactured a hypthesis in Puntuated Equilibrium to justify the quickness of speciation because TIME was NOT on their side. Only a fool would have fell for the stalinist Gould rhetoric that became SCIENCTIFIC FACTS. Dopplerganger, you're a darn idiot!Scientism is what what those cahracters preach........IT IS A RELIGION! POst my popst or not! Jesus is Lord.like it or not....fact is.......not one of those self righteous jackals will be able to save you from the grave! Those people aren't gods....they are deceivers...Never trust the bone readers just because they have a degree. They don't teach what they know. They teach what they believe. Dopplegang.......you haven't the courage to email me and debate facts about EVOLUTION! I mean FACTS!

 
At 1:50 AM, December 07, 2008, Blogger Intelligent Designer said...

Hello Anonymous,

Something tells me you aren't really a Christian. I am thinking that you are probably a pharnygulite mascaraing as a Christian.

If you a Christian, you're not a very good one. When I was a Christian the one thing I did learn is that if you disagree with someone you ought to do it without calling them an idiot or a jackass.

 
At 1:41 PM, November 20, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home