In the December 17, 2012 edition of The Tacoma [WA] News-Tribune there was an article datelined London by Jill Lawless of the Associated Press entitled “Scientists study ‘missing link’ hoax”. The article described the so-called “discovery” in 1912 by amateur archaeologist Charles Dawson of an ancient and apparently pre-human hominid near the village of Piltdown in southern England. The age of the “Piltdown Man” skull, as it was subsequently labeled, was thought to be nearly a million years.

This widely-broadcast “find”, representing as it did the fervently-sought “missing link” between ape and man, lent tremendous support to Darwin’s controversial theory of evolution, seriously wounding the faith of many Christians and impacting even the houses of Christian theology, the seminaries. From Darwin’s time on, aided by such “finds”, Christians who had placed their faith in the inerrancy of the Bible desperately sought ways in which they might accommodate this new “fact” of evolution into the creation story of Genesis Chapter One.

For the next forty years, as Ms. Lawless’ article notes, the Piltdown Man was perceived to be irrefutable fact. By then, some seminaries had backed off from their stance on the inerrancy of the Bible, and many Christians, pastors and laypersons alike, had accepted this new thought into their personal understandings of Christianity.

The Piltdown Man was then exposed as a hoax, found to have consisted of a human skull (a few hundred years old) and the jaw of an orangutan. The fraudulent assembly was then stained to make it look ancient.

The rest of Ms. Lawless’ story centered on the ongoing scientific investigation into what possibly could have driven the perpetrator(s) of such an egregious hoax to do such a dastardly deed and, peripherally, what could have allowed it to have been accepted by science for so long. What was missing in her story is the half-hearted manner in which the scientists of that day up to the present, disseminated to the public the truth of the matter. It is doubtful that this omission was intentional, as was the flavor of her story, which appeared to convey the thought that this hoax was an exception to an otherwise completely honest run of subsequent “findings” of supposed “missing links”. One would think from the tale that this was a one-time aberration in a science dominated by objective researchers whose hearts were as pure as the driven snow.

Nothing could be further than the truth. The actuality of the matter is that the Piltdown Man was just one of an unbroken string of deliberate deceits. It wasn’t even the first. One Christian scholar who investigated the whole sordid affair up until the time of his passing was Dr. Grant Jeffrey.

According to Dr. Jeffrey, in his 2003 book Creation, published by Frontier Research Publications, Inc.,

“There is no fossil evidence to support evolution. Many Christians and Jews who have been troubled by the claims of evolution will be astonished to discover that the evolutionists knew all along that there was no fossil evidence in support of evolution. Yet, many textbooks and teachers boldly declared that the fossils proved evolution to be true.

“After a century and a half of claims by evolutionists that just a little more time would produce the necessary fossil evidence of the missing links between species that would confirm the theory of evolution, we find there is an astonishing and total lack of fossil evidence to confirm any indisputable transitional forms, or ‘missing links,’ that must exist if the theory of evolution were actually scientifically true. However, in over one hundred and fifty years of a massive global search by scientists that has catalogued over one hundred million fossil specimens in museums and laboratories, they have failed to discover a single ‘missing link’ fossil. If the evolutionists were intellectually honest, they would have abandoned evolution long ago.

“In 1859, Charles Darwin acknowledged that the utter lack of fossil evidence for these missing links between one species and another provided ‘an unanswerable objection’ to the theory of evolution. However, Darwin assumed that the search for fossils that would establish the truth of evolution was just beginning and that, given sufficient time and effort, scientists would soon discover the millions of transitional fossils required to prove that one species gradually transformed itself by natural selection into a new species.” [Italics in the original.]

Jeffrey goes on to say that “To date, though, every species discovered in the fossil record appears perfectly formed. Paleontologists have never discovered a fossil showing a partially formed species or a partially formed organ.”

He documents a number of supposed ‘missing links’ between ape and man, all of which were subsequently exposed as outright frauds. They are listed below.

With the help of untrained convicts, fossilized bone fragments of what came to be called Java Man were dug up in 1891 on the Indonesian island of Java. On the basis of nothing more than a fragment of a skull cap, three molar teeth and a bone fragment of a thighbone, the director of the find, Dr. Eugene Dubois, identified the fossils as belonging to Homo erectus, a humanoid three quarters of a million years old. Attempts to confirm his claims uncovered the following facts: the thighbone fragment was identical to that of a modern human; the skull cap was found forty-six feet away from the other fragments; there was no logical reason to associate the skull cap with the thighbone.

Piltdown Man I and II were supposedly discovered in 1912 and 1917 at the Piltdown quarry in England by amateur geologist Charles Dawson. In 1953, after over forty years of unquestioning acceptance of these findings as genuine, the skulls, after being examined by more modern techniques, were found to be intentional frauds. The skull described by Jeffrey was a composite of skull fragments of modern man and orangutan jaw. Worse, the bones had been dyed with bichromate of potash to make them appear ancient. Although evolutionists generally agree that Piltdown man was an outright fraud, they don’t speak much about this incident.

Nebraska Man was found in 1922 in western Nebraska by Professor Harold Cook. His find was supported by Dr. Henry F. Osborn, head of the American Museum of History, who touted the find as finally representing the evidence linking chimpanzees, Java Man and modern man. The Java man, as noted above, was since exposed as fictitious. So was Nebraska Man, whose supposed existence was used as evidence in the famous 1925 Scopes evolution trial. The problem was that the ‘evidence’ amounted to a single tooth, around which very imaginative evolution-minded artists created a picture of how they wished a missing link to look. It gets worse: the tooth was later found to have belonged to an extinct pig. The same fiction applies to the Southwest Colorado Man, another ‘evolutionary discovery’ that also turned out to have been based on a mere tooth, this one belonging to an ancient horse.

In 1932 another supposed missing link, Ramapithecus, was found in Africa. This ‘discovery’ amounted to nothing more than some fossilized teeth, which were later found to belong to the modern orangutan. Here again, evolutionists generally acknowledge this ‘discovery’ to be false.

Dr. Jeffrey also notes that the same kind of problems attend the discovery of ‘Lucy’ in 1974. In this case, Professor Richard Leakey claimed that ‘Lucy’ was an ape-like creature who walked upright. However, the lengths of the forearm fossils found in the vicinity strongly suggest that ‘Lucy’ walked on all fours like any other ape-like creature. Even Dr. Leakey admitted to exercising a large amount of imagination to create a picture from a few bone fragments. What puts the lie to these excursions of the imagination is that in many, if not all, cases there is actually no logical reason to assume that the fragments belong to a single creature.

Even with such a shady history of attempting to create missing links where missing links didn’t exist, the evolutionists continued to pull the wool over their own eyes as well of those of their associates and an all too-trusting public by trotting out Peking Man, Neanderthal Man, and Cro-Magnon man in a dismal and apparently desperate attempt to justify their system of belief. All three of these, it turns out, were nothing more nor less than fully human, a fact quite reluctantly admitted by the community of evolutionists.

If the history of evolutionists’ attempt to find the missing link between ape and man has yielded nothing more than a sordid collection of frauds, perhaps they can fall back on the find in Australia of an archaeopteryx fossil, this creature supposedly representing a link between reptiles and birds.

Perhaps not. At least not in honesty. The notion that this bird represents a transitional form came from its teeth, which are unusual in a bird and more usual to a reptile. Everything else about this fossil shows absolutely nothing contradictory to what constitutes a bird. The unusual feature of teeth is not so unusual after all, considering that some reptiles have no teeth while other fossils of birds do, and other strange creatures, like the duck-billed platypus, exist that are not considered to be missing links.

But what about the dinosaur-bird so highly publicized by the National Geographic magazine, who artistically (and fictionally) portrayed a baby dinosaur with feathers and claimed that birds belong to the family of bipedal dinosaurs.

Even the community of evolutionists was taken aback by this hasty conclusion. Jeffrey quotes Professor Storrs Olson, curator of birds at the Smithsonian in the following condemnation:

“National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism. . . It eventually became clear to me that National Geographic was not interested in anything other than the prevailing dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: