Discussion:
Outpouring of joy over Piltdown Man finding
Add Reply
Amazing Answers
2020-05-23 23:01:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.

We read from a pro-evolution site:

"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."

https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin

Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.

Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Oko tillo
2020-05-23 23:21:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
one week ago today:


"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".


Oko
Amazing Answers
2020-05-23 23:34:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Oko tillo
2020-05-23 23:53:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.


Oko
Amazing Answers
2020-05-23 23:55:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Oko
There's just a handful of evidence that evolutionist claim as their own.
Yap Honghor
2020-05-24 00:01:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Oko
There's just a handful of evidence that evolutionist claim as their own.
The same way you have been convicted of your crime????
Oko tillo
2020-05-24 00:27:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Oko
There's just a handful of evidence that evolutionist claim as their own.
That's just one isolated example that no evolutionary biologist I know of belives.

Got something current? This century would be nice.


Oko
Oko tillo
2020-05-24 00:35:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Oko
There's just a handful of evidence that evolutionist claim as their own.
Which handful would that be? The evidence from population genetics?

Or the evidence from evo-devo?

Or the evidence from cladistics?

Or the evidence from comparative genomics?

Or the evidence from paleontology?

Or the evidence from molecular phylogenetics?

Just which particular handful did you have in mind?



Oko
michellemalkingmail.com
2020-05-24 06:32:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Oko
There's just a handful of evidence that evolutionist claim as their own.
Poor Johnboi. After awhile he starts to sound totally desperate.
Don Martin
2020-05-24 12:59:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 23 May 2020 16:53:18 -0700 (PDT), Oko tillo
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Post by Oko tillo
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Naw, just my periodic reminder that though you keep claiming that evolutionary biology
is riddled and rotten with hoaxes, all you can produce is that musty handful you
seem to keep in a shoebox in your closet.
Along with a rather stiff sweat sock he keeps for other amazing
experiences while developing his answers.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Yap Honghor
2020-05-23 23:59:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
Sounds like you had tears of crocodile proportions.
Sounds like you are not just a big liar but also a true criminal...who might have sold some fake drugs in the past?
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-24 02:49:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Amazingly Stupid wrote:

Nothing he hasn't had debunked many times before.
IOW a PRATT.

Next he will tell us another such as:

If you lined up all the animals IN THE WORLD.

You'd have a really dull parade.
Amazing Answers
2020-05-24 04:32:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Nothing he hasn't had debunked many times before.
IOW a PRATT.
If you lined up all the animals IN THE WORLD.
You'd have a really dull parade.
Sounds grandiose.

"Debunked many times"

Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?

The point is that my pro evolution source said that there was 'an out pouring of joy' when Piltdown came out. That evolutionists found what they were looking for. You and neither any other evolutionist responding on this thread answered those points.
Oko tillo
2020-05-24 04:57:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Nothing he hasn't had debunked many times before.
IOW a PRATT.
If you lined up all the animals IN THE WORLD.
You'd have a really dull parade.
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Sounds grandiose.
"Debunked many times"
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
The point is that my pro evolution source said that there was 'an out pouring of joy' when Piltdown came out.
Jingoistic, nationalistic, "patriotic" joy in the popular mind -- the British popular mind --
when the story "hit headlines around the world" because they thought they had gone
one up on the Germans. In the political climate that would soon become World War I.

You know, the kind of "outpouring of joy" we see in "USA! USA! USA!"

That phrase in the article refers to the man in the street, not to "evolutionists".

And about your "pro evolution source"? I found very few other articles on the site
about evolution. In fact this one was on history, not the theory of evolution.

But it clearly is a pro science site. So yes , same thing.

Oko
Post by Amazing Answers
That evolutionists found what they were looking for. You and neither any other evolutionist responding on this thread answered those points.
JWS
2020-05-24 04:59:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Nothing he hasn't had debunked many times before.
IOW a PRATT.
If you lined up all the animals IN THE WORLD.
You'd have a really dull parade.
Sounds grandiose.
"Debunked many times"
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
The point is that my pro evolution source said that there was 'an out pouring of joy' when Piltdown came out. That evolutionists found what they were looking for. You and neither any other evolutionist responding on this thread answered those points.
And how do we know it was a hoax?
When the evidence was finally allowed to be examined by
other scientists, the hoax was discovered. It certainly
wasn't xtian morons who figured it out. A xtian doesn't
understand shit about anything.
Automatic
2020-05-25 06:13:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JWS
Post by Amazing Answers
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
And how do we know it was a hoax?
It has been common knowledge for a long time.
Post by JWS
A xtian doesn't
understand shit about anything.
That is what you think about six supreme court justices?
Yap Honghor
2020-05-25 09:45:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by JWS
Post by Amazing Answers
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
And how do we know it was a hoax?
It has been common knowledge for a long time.
It was thought to be real from the beginning. But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
Post by Automatic
Post by JWS
A xtian doesn't
understand shit about anything.
That is what you think about six supreme court justices?
Aren't they Christians????
Christopher A. Lee
2020-05-25 12:34:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 25 May 2020 02:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Automatic
Post by JWS
Post by Amazing Answers
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
And how do we know it was a hoax?
It has been common knowledge for a long time.
It was thought to be real from the beginning. But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
Not by everybody. It was always anomalous. Piltdown's timeline...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man#Timeline


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man#Timeline

1908: Dawson claims discovery of first Piltdown fragments.
1912 February: Dawson contacts Woodward about first skull
fragments.
1912 June: Dawson, Woodward, and Teilhard de Chardin form digging
team.
1912 June: Team finds elephant molar, skull fragment.
1912 June: Right parietal skull bones and the jaw bone discovered.
1912 November: News breaks in the popular press.
1912 December: Official presentation of Piltdown Man.
1913: David Waterston concludes the sample to be an ape mandible
and a human skull.
1914: Talgai skull (Australia) found, considered, at the time, to
confirm Piltdown.
1915: Marcellin Boule concludes the sample to be an ape mandible
and a human skull. Gerrit Smith Miller concludes the jaw is from a
fossil ape.
1923: Franz Weidenreich reports the remains consist of a modern
human cranium and orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth.
1925: Edmonds reports Piltdown geology error. Report ignored.
1943: Fluorine content test is first proposed.
1948: The Earliest Englishman by Woodward is published
(posthumously).
1949: Fluorine content test establishes Piltdown Man as relatively
recent.
1953: Weiner, Le Gros Clark, and Oakley expose the hoax.
2003: Full nature of Charles Dawson's career in fakes is exposed.
2016: Study reveals method of Dawson's forgery.
Automatic
2020-05-25 16:33:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
%
2020-05-25 16:38:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
no one believes what you heard
Automatic
2020-05-25 16:41:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
no one believes what you
Stop projecting about yourself:

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160328

The results presented here have added substantial and previously unknown information to the tale of Piltdown man. The orang-utan material used to forge the Piltdown I mandible and molars, and Piltdown II molar very likely originated from a single orang-utan specimen related most closely to the populations now occupying southwest Sarawak (Borneo). Although the historic range of this haplogroup may have varied in the past [26], we can be relatively certain that the orang-utan was born and probably raised in Borneo, since, to the best of our knowledge, no orang-utans successfully produced offspring in Europe until 1926 [30] and most orang-utans brought to Europe around the time Piltdown man was constructed survived on average only a couple of years
%
2020-05-25 16:48:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
no one believes what you
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160328
The results presented here have added substantial and previously unknown information to the tale of Piltdown man. The orang-utan material used to forge the Piltdown I mandible and molars, and Piltdown II molar very likely originated from a single orang-utan specimen related most closely to the populations now occupying southwest Sarawak (Borneo). Although the historic range of this haplogroup may have varied in the past [26], we can be relatively certain that the orang-utan was born and probably raised in Borneo, since, to the best of our knowledge, no orang-utans successfully produced offspring in Europe until 1926 [30] and most orang-utans brought to Europe around the time Piltdown man was constructed survived on average only a couple of years
no one here believes your forgeries
Automatic
2020-05-25 16:50:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
no one believes what you
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160328
The results presented here have added substantial and previously unknown information to the tale of Piltdown man. The orang-utan material used to forge the Piltdown I mandible and molars, and Piltdown II molar very likely originated from a single orang-utan specimen related most closely to the populations now occupying southwest Sarawak (Borneo). Although the historic range of this haplogroup may have varied in the past [26], we can be relatively certain that the orang-utan was born and probably raised in Borneo, since, to the best of our knowledge, no orang-utans successfully produced offspring in Europe until 1926 [30] and most orang-utans brought to Europe around the time Piltdown man was constructed survived on average only a couple of years
no one here believes your forgeries
I am not a forger.
Have you been doing forgeries?
%
2020-05-25 16:57:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
no one believes what you
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160328
The results presented here have added substantial and previously unknown information to the tale of Piltdown man. The orang-utan material used to forge the Piltdown I mandible and molars, and Piltdown II molar very likely originated from a single orang-utan specimen related most closely to the populations now occupying southwest Sarawak (Borneo). Although the historic range of this haplogroup may have varied in the past [26], we can be relatively certain that the orang-utan was born and probably raised in Borneo, since, to the best of our knowledge, no orang-utans successfully produced offspring in Europe until 1926 [30] and most orang-utans brought to Europe around the time Piltdown man was constructed survived on average only a couple of years
no one here believes your forgeries
Automatic
2020-05-25 17:00:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
%
2020-05-25 17:05:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
Automatic
2020-05-25 17:25:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
%
2020-05-25 18:24:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
Automatic
2020-05-25 18:27:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
%
2020-05-25 18:52:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not like you i'm like me
Automatic
2020-05-25 19:53:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
%
2020-05-25 19:55:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Automatic
2020-05-25 19:57:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
%
2020-05-25 20:56:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
what
Automatic
2020-05-25 21:30:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
what
I'm not like you; you are not me, and I am not you.
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-26 00:19:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
what
I'm not like you; you are not me, and I am not you.
That's what you always say, Robert.
Automatic
2020-05-26 00:37:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
what
I'm not like you; you are not me, and I am not you.
That's what you always say, Robert.
It is obvious you have identity confusion.
%
2020-05-26 01:02:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
no one here believes your forgeries
Here he just makes up something for no apparent reason and points the finger libeling and slandering from his fantasy imagination.
no one believes your lies
What are you accusing me of forging, specifically?
yourself
So you are like a crazy person.
no i'm not
You sure are doing a rather good imitation of one.
i'm just being like you
Only in your deluded mind do you think that.
Reality indicates otherwise, contrary to your hot air.
what
I'm not like you; you are not me, and I am not you.
i told you this yesterday
Yap Honghor
2020-05-26 00:24:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Yap Honghor
But thing get examined for sometime before fake is discovered!
I heard they recently examined dna from the teeth at the two sites and the dna matched, according to some people who studied it for several years.
As in any commercial product, there will be con man and fake product!
Are you born yesterday????
Yap Honghor
2020-05-24 09:00:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Nothing he hasn't had debunked many times before.
IOW a PRATT.
If you lined up all the animals IN THE WORLD.
You'd have a really dull parade.
Sounds grandiose.
"Debunked many times"
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
The point is that my pro evolution source said that there was 'an out pouring of joy' when Piltdown came out. That evolutionists found what they were looking for. You and neither any other evolutionist responding on this thread answered those points.
So anything would take time to verify or check...just like the coronavirus, it needs time to verify, check and test before confirming it is new, infectious and further require time to prevent, eradicate and cure! As for vaccine, we need even longer time!!!!
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-25 01:48:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Not even relevant to this thread. You admit that >Piltdown was a hoax. That wasn't the point of this thread. Can you not read?
The point is that my pro evolution source said that there was 'an out pouring of joy' when Piltdown came out.
That evolutionists found what they were looking for.
Before they got a chance to examine it closely.
You and neither any other evolutionist responding on this thread answered those points.
Because we have a pretty good idea of where you are going with this. The only thing that really matters is that it was science that discovered it was a hoax.

That's what science does, it checks and rechecked and peer reviews so that if there are errors, they will be found.
They were.

Scientists are always happy when a new discovery is found. They want to learn and understand more about the world.
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-25 02:00:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Scientists are always happy when a new discovery is found. They want to learn and understand more about the world.

After all with this "discovery" scientists thought an intermediate fossil had been found linking man to an older group of fossils.

It didn't take long for it to be discovered to be fake from 2 different species. The teeth were filed to make them look human.

Why do you go on and on about a tiny blip on the radar of science.

Everything happened just like it was supposed to.

Alleged discovery.

Evaluation

Declaration of authenticity or lack thereof.

How should it have been done differently?

What has this to do with anything, especially, evolution which is accepted by virtually all scientists as a fact? Why do you wish to argue over things that do not matter in order to try and discredit science that has been confirmed for well over a century and a half?

Why do you think this is important re evolution?

Do you have any evidence that supports some other accounting for the changes of species over time?

I didn't think so.
michellemalkingmail.com
2020-05-24 05:56:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Being both lazy and a bad typist, I'll just cut and paste something I wrote to you
"Remarkably reminiscent of all your posts claiming that evolution is full of hoaxes
and yet when challenged about that, you recycle a small handful, the most recent of
them a century old".
Oko
This is John McCoy's once a year Piltdown man post. He's aware that it was
scientists from about a century ago who discovered and reported the hoax.
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-23 23:49:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
Amazing Answers
2020-05-23 23:54:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
It's the last century of professors who taught this century's professors. The blind leading the blind.
Oko tillo
2020-05-24 00:29:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
==
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
It's the last century of professors who taught this century's professors.
The blind leading the blind.
It would be if nothing new was ever learned in evolutionary theory, and evolution
was like a religion where not a word of the sacred texts is allowed to be changed.

The truth of course, is precisely the opposite.


Oko
michellemalkingmail.com
2020-05-24 06:05:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
It's the last century of professors who taught this century's professors. The blind leading the blind.
The professor's teaching this century's paleoanthropologists probably
weren't even born when the hoax took place, Hoaxboi. The bones were
found in 1912 and revealed by scientists to be a hoax in 1953.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
michellemalkingmail.com
2020-05-24 06:30:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
It's the last century of professors who taught this century's professors. The blind leading the blind.
So what? This century is only 20 years old. The hoax happened in 1912.
That 108 years ago. The hoax was discovered 67 years ago. A lot of the
professors you are nattering about probably weren't even born until
after the hoax was discovered.
the hoax

A perfect book for you to read, John Monkeyboi, is John H. Relethfords'
"50 Great Myths of Human Evolution", John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2017

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/solving-the-piltdown-man-scientific-fraud/

The above link also has more links to info on the Piltdown Man hoax. Johnboi
doesn't seem to realize that every time he brings up this topic, we find
even more recent articles about it. Thanks, Johnboi!
SkyEyes
2020-05-25 21:23:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Still nothing from this century.
It's the last century of professors who taught this century's professors. The blind leading the blind.
I was a freshman in college in 1967, and during my years there I took both zoology and physical anthropology classes covering human evolution. In no class that I took was Piltdown Man even *mentioned*, let alone *taught*.

Why don't you go take a college course in human evolution and find out what is really taught in this day-and-age?

Oh, right. Because it would go against your religious prejudices.

Brenda Nelson, A.A. #34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
***@cox.net
John Locke
2020-05-24 00:08:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 23 May 2020 16:01:38 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
...a century old forgery ? What's your point ? The faked fossil was
discovered in 1953 and the problem rectified. This is the way of
science. Religion, on the other hand, when proven false (which is damn
near everything about religion), fails to correct itself and simply
plods along blindly with the same false, uncorrected, irrevocable
bullshit.
Christopher A. Lee
2020-05-24 05:18:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 23 May 2020 17:08:12 -0700, John Locke
Post by John Locke
On Sat, 23 May 2020 16:01:38 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
...a century old forgery ? What's your point ? The faked fossil was
discovered in 1953 and the problem rectified. This is the way of
science. Religion, on the other hand, when proven false (which is damn
near everything about religion), fails to correct itself and simply
plods along blindly with the same false, uncorrected, irrevocable
bullshit.
Long before 1953 - that was when the results of fluorine testing put
the final nail in its coffin.

It always was an anomaly, outside what was known of human ancestry by
palaeontologists.

And it was a hoax by an amateur fossil-collector trying to get himself
a reputation, not by "evolutionists".

The experts didn't get to see the original specimen because it would
have been priceless. All they got were plaster casts because they
didn't have any kind of modern imaging

But when they finally got to examine the original, it was obvious what
it was, and you could even see the marks where the human cranium and
ape jaw had been filed down to fit each other.

Which the OP knows because he has had this explained over and over
again.
Heinz Heinrich Spanknobe
2020-05-24 14:13:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears
of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of
crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution
'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular
discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of
England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a
human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as
rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It
seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal
oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring
of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in
the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the
Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-o
f-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
All science is a hoax. There are no scientists in The Bible. Give all your
money to the Church.
Yap Honghor
2020-05-25 01:38:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears
of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of
crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution
'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular
discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of
England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a
human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as
rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It
seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal
oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring
of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in
the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the
Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-o
f-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
All science is a hoax. There are no scientists in The Bible. Give all your money to the Church.
That is the reason why he is short of money and planning all his life to return to his original skill as a drug pusher...

And he is struggling to be free from the surveillance imposed on him!!!
michellemalkingmail.com
2020-05-25 06:40:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Heinz Heinrich Spanknobe
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears
of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of
crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution
'scientists' found what they were looking for.
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular
discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of
England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a
human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as
rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It
seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal
oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring
of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in
the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the
Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-o
f-african-origin
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
All science is a hoax. There are no scientists in The Bible. Give all your
money to the Church.
Which one? They reproduce like insects.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-25 03:35:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
Can you imagine being there in the USA when Creationists wet their pants when the "existence" of man-tracks contemporary with dinosaurs was shown at the Paluxy River track site by Carl Baugh? Their bloated bladders releasing epic Noahic Floods of urine rivaling the Greatest Flood On Earth that came flowing because the Creationist believers found what they were looking for-evidence that humankind and dinosaurs were contemporaneous!
Post by Amazing Answers
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
The Creationists continued their river of gold when a few years ago, the famous fickle finger of fate came to grace the Baugh collection. And with that came the London Hammer, proof that miner's hammers were produced during dinosaur times.

Yes indeed, the Creationist believers had an outpouring of joy. Somewhat messy and odorous, as urine is likely to be, although this bounteous micturation was, of course, an outpouring of urine over several hoaxes.
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
"Outpouring" scarcely describes the orgiastic outflow of the Creationists.
Post by Amazing Answers
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Of course, it was a hoax.

And years later, I have four or five books on the Piltdown Hoax. Written mostly by scientists or science writers. T can see about fifteen or twenty books in English addressing the Hoax.

But I see absolutely no books by Creationists mentioning the Paluxy Hoaxes.

I remember seeing a website by theists recognizing Paluxy et al as a hoax. Good for them.

Science discovers mistakes, correcting them and acknowledging them.

Creationism glosses over their mistakes, and ignores them. Likely repeats them.

They lie for their God.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Oko tillo
2020-05-25 03:59:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
Can you imagine being there in the USA when Creationists wet their pants when the "existence" of man-tracks contemporary with dinosaurs was shown at the Paluxy River track site by Carl Baugh? Their bloated bladders releasing epic Noahic Floods of urine rivaling the Greatest Flood On Earth that came flowing because the Creationist believers found what they were looking for-evidence that humankind and dinosaurs were contemporaneous!
Post by Amazing Answers
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
The Creationists continued their river of gold when a few years ago, the famous fickle finger of fate came to grace the Baugh collection. And with that came the London Hammer, proof that miner's hammers were produced during dinosaur times.
Yes indeed, the Creationist believers had an outpouring of joy. Somewhat messy and odorous, as urine is likely to be, although this bounteous micturation was, of course, an outpouring of urine over several hoaxes.
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
"Outpouring" scarcely describes the orgiastic outflow of the Creationists.
Post by Amazing Answers
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Of course, it was a hoax.
==
Post by Marvin Sebourn
And years later, I have four or five books on the Piltdown Hoax. Written mostly by scientists or science writers. T can see about fifteen or twenty books in English addressing the Hoax.
But I see absolutely no books by Creationists mentioning the Paluxy Hoaxes.
I remember seeing a website by theists recognizing Paluxy et al as a hoax. Good for them.
Yep. That noted geologist, Henry Morris, author of "Flood Geology" -- no doubt
you've seen this cutting edge scientific tome -- was the one who brought the
Paluxy tracks to widespread attention.

And Hank's son, John D., president of the Institute for Creation Research
published a book on them, "Tracking Those Incredible Dinosaurs".

And then later pulled it, writing:

"In 1982, the American Humanist Association commissioned four well-known
anti-creationists to frequent the Paluxy in an endeavor to refute my book.
Meanwhile, I continued to do research. Through their efforts and my own research,
it became obvious there was a problem, and in 1984 I concluded we had most likely
made an error. It was erroneous to claim the human-like prints were probably human."

To his credit.

Not so much the ICR, which continued pushing Paluxy for years after John D. said that.

For your appreciation: I doubt that McCoy will see this; he appears to have done one
of his periodic hit-and-runs.


Oko
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Science discovers mistakes, correcting them and acknowledging them.
Creationism glosses over their mistakes, and ignores them. Likely repeats them.
They lie for their God.
Marvin Sebourn
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-25 17:11:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Oko tillo
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
Can you imagine being there in the USA when Creationists wet their pants when the "existence" of man-tracks contemporary with dinosaurs was shown at the Paluxy River track site by Carl Baugh? Their bloated bladders releasing epic Noahic Floods of urine rivaling the Greatest Flood On Earth that came flowing because the Creationist believers found what they were looking for-evidence that humankind and dinosaurs were contemporaneous!
Post by Amazing Answers
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
The Creationists continued their river of gold when a few years ago, the famous fickle finger of fate came to grace the Baugh collection. And with that came the London Hammer, proof that miner's hammers were produced during dinosaur times.
Yes indeed, the Creationist believers had an outpouring of joy. Somewhat messy and odorous, as urine is likely to be, although this bounteous micturation was, of course, an outpouring of urine over several hoaxes.
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
"Outpouring" scarcely describes the orgiastic outflow of the Creationists.
Post by Amazing Answers
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Of course, it was a hoax.
==
Post by Marvin Sebourn
And years later, I have four or five books on the Piltdown Hoax. Written mostly by scientists or science writers. T can see about fifteen or twenty books in English addressing the Hoax.
But I see absolutely no books by Creationists mentioning the Paluxy Hoaxes.
I remember seeing a website by theists recognizing Paluxy et al as a hoax. Good for them.
Yep. That noted geologist, Henry Morris, author of "Flood Geology" -- no doubt
you've seen this cutting edge scientific tome -- was the one who brought the
Paluxy tracks to widespread attention.
And Hank's son, John D., president of the Institute for Creation Research
published a book on them, "Tracking Those Incredible Dinosaurs".
"In 1982, the American Humanist Association commissioned four well-known
anti-creationists to frequent the Paluxy in an endeavor to refute my book.
Meanwhile, I continued to do research. Through their efforts and my own research,
it became obvious there was a problem, and in 1984 I concluded we had most likely
made an error. It was erroneous to claim the human-like prints were probably human."
To his credit.
Not so much the ICR, which continued pushing Paluxy for years after John D. said that.
For your appreciation: I doubt that McCoy will see this; he appears to have done one
of his periodic hit-and-runs.
Laughingly this was another of McCoy's reversed hit-and-runs. He came off a side street, aimed to damage, but suffered damage from the intended "hit". And then he ran.

At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.

On one trip to the U.K. we motored around, and-serendipity-found ourselves viewing a road sign labeled "Piltdown". The property seemed inaccessible to a hurried search, but we did find the Piltdown Tavern, and I had a half-pint there. Photos may be coming.

Tx, Oko,
Marvin

Marvin Sebourn
Post by Oko tillo
Oko
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Science discovers mistakes, correcting them and acknowledging them.
Creationism glosses over their mistakes, and ignores them. Likely repeats them.
They lie for their God.
Marvin Sebourn
Automatic
2020-05-25 17:23:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).

How long would ti take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Automatic
2020-05-25 17:23:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-25 20:24:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish. And that is even after your revision.

I thought Dawson to be the culprit several years ago, and you had absolutely no influence upon my judgement.

Please translate and repost.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-25 20:34:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-25 22:31:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.

More Automatic gibberish. Many of your postings area as close to reality as the output of a Postmodern phrase generator.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-25 22:56:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
%
2020-05-25 23:01:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong just because you say ,
but anyway do you have any friends here people you can have ,
fun conversations with people you can joke and have fun with
Automatic
2020-05-25 23:02:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
%
2020-05-25 23:15:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong just because you say ,
but anyway do you have any friends here people you can have ,
fun conversations with people you can joke and have fun with
Automatic
2020-05-25 23:28:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
%
2020-05-26 00:15:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
Automatic
2020-05-26 00:17:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
%
2020-05-26 01:01:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
Automatic
2020-05-26 01:05:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
When? Stop making things up.

I am not you, and you are not me.

Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-26 01:50:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
No, Robert, you are the confused one.

You keep up your little charade as long as you want.
We will find you and put you where you belong.
Automatic
2020-05-26 02:16:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Automatic
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
No, Robert, you are the confused one.
My name isn't robert.
Cloud Hobbit
2020-05-26 03:02:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
My name isn't robert.
That's what they all say when caught.

You are the one spying on us and now you have been found out and try to dance away.

If you hadn't done what you claimed you didn't do, then you wouldn't have lied.

But you did, Robert, and we all know how despicable you are.

The DEA will be watching you forever. You are not to be trusted.
Automatic
2020-05-26 03:08:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you hadn't done what you claimed you didn't do
You are the one who claimed I did something illegal that i didn't, thusly you lied.
%
2020-05-26 17:21:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Automatic
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
No, Robert, you are the confused one.
My name isn't robert.
but i still proved you lie within your physical self

%
2020-05-26 02:00:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
When? Stop making things up.
I am not you, and you are not me.
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
show me one of my socks ,
last chance or it's another lie of yours i proved
Automatic
2020-05-26 02:17:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
When? Stop making things up.
I am not you, and you are not me.
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
show me one of my socks
Percentage, others in this group have shown you have done sockpuppets, and you have admitted you did those, and you have taken credit for sockpuppets that may or may not have been done for you, so you have zero credibility on your apparent denial at this time.
Automatic
2020-05-26 02:18:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
When? Stop making things up.
I am not you, and you are not me.
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
show me one of my socks
Percentage, others in this group have shown you have done sockpuppets, and you have admitted you did those, and you have taken credit for sockpuppets that may or may not have been done by you, so you have zero credibility on your apparent denial at this time.
%
2020-05-26 17:18:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by %
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam. After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong
Just your socks, because you are.
do you do anything else in usenet besides ,
tell everybody they're wrong , the odds are against you ,
so many people we all can't be wrong
If they are your socks they are guaranteed to be.
show me one of my socks
You so fat you can't see your own?
and you say i talk gibberish
When? Stop making things up.
I am not you, and you are not me.
Looks like your sockpuppet games only confuse you.
show me one of my socks
Percentage, others in this group have shown you have done sockpuppets, and you have admitted you did those, and you have taken credit for sockpuppets that may or may not have been done for you, so you have zero credibility on your apparent denial at this time.
you have had lots of time to show me ,
one by now and you didn't ,
by a preponderance of the evidence ,
i have proved you are the liar
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 02:02:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam.
After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
Only two questions for you:

1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, after I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?

2) When did you decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer? Month and year, preferably, please.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-26 02:23:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam.
After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer
If I were to take what you currently say about it.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) When did you decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer?
I haven't decided anything at all about the piltdown man find, except that it was fraudulent and that was known by common knowledge since I was a minor.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 02:39:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would it take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
Gibberish.
Obviously you have severe mental impairment.
Obviously I have been confronted by someone with severe mental impairment, and someone too cowardly to avoid snipping the hard-to-answer parts.
More Automatic gibberish.
When did piltdown occur? You formulated a wrong idea as to what happened. You thought someone else did the scam.
After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it.
Automatically, using deception in his reply:

Auto said I said: > > 1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer

and conveniently and cowardly snipped the following from the sentence: "... after I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?"

So that my full question was "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, after I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?

And you cowardly snipped a critical part of my question.

So what is the answer to my un-snipped question #1?

Afraid, aren't you? Afraid to address the whole truth without snipping, dodging, or obfuscation.

Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
If I were to take what you currently say about it.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) When did you decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer?
I haven't decided anything at all about the piltdown man find, except that it was fraudulent and that was known by common knowledge since I was a minor.
Automatic
2020-05-26 02:41:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
So that my full question was "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, after I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you cowardly snipped a critical part of my question.
So what is the answer to my un-snipped question #1?
Afraid, aren't you? Afraid to address the whole truth without snipping, dodging, or obfuscation.
Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
If I were to take what you currently say about it.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) When did you decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer?
I haven't decided anything at all about the piltdown man find, except that it was fraudulent and that was known by common knowledge since I was a minor.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 03:40:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
Auto Drip (dry):
Marvin asks a question nobody else would know the answer to and repeats it, demanding an answer to his nonsense:

And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?

And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.

Your last post, robert, was one of the most cowardly-in-retreat posts I have ever read. Bets are that you still won't answer the simple, full, question 1).

Marvin Sebourn
Post by Marvin Sebourn
So that my full question was "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, after I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you cowardly snipped a critical part of my question.
So what is the answer to my un-snipped question #1?
Afraid, aren't you? Afraid to address the whole truth without snipping, dodging, or obfuscation.
Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
If I were to take what you currently say about it.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) When did you decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer?
I haven't decided anything at all about the piltdown man find, except that it was fraudulent and that was known by common knowledge since I was a minor.
Automatic
2020-05-26 03:43:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer
No one else would know that, except you, and it is known your word is worthless; since no one else could know, your question is ridiculous nonsense.
Automatic
2020-05-26 03:44:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all.
Automatic
2020-05-26 03:45:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 04:44:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that.
1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article.

2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that.

Let's play hardball.

If you can prove 1) and 2), then I will be the liar, and you can publicly brand me as such. And I will publicly acknowledge that in this thread.

If I can prove that both your statements 1) and 2) are in error, then YOU are the liar, you will be branded as such, and you should publicly acknowledge that in this thread.

Do you have the guts or the gonads to continue, and tell the truth?

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-26 05:06:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that.
1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article.
2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that.
Let's play hardball.
If you can prove 1) and 2), then I will be the liar, and you can publicly brand me as such. And I will publicly acknowledge that in this thread.
I predict you won't admit you are the liar:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/hHzCFas_BAAJ

"After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it=
."

here is your phony claim:

"1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article."

No, I stated you typed you changed your mind after I posted the above url.
Which you did state.

"2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that."

One hour after i posted the url, you post this:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/L4SZadQsBAAJ

"At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax,
but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer."

Was my prediction correct?
Yes.
Will you deny I am right and *YOU* were wrong? Probably so.
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 15:27:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that.
1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article.
2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that.
Let's play hardball.
If you can prove 1) and 2), then I will be the liar, and you can publicly brand me as such. And I will publicly acknowledge that in this thread.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/hHzCFas_BAAJ
"After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it=
."
"1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article."
No, I stated you typed you changed your mind after I posted the above url.
Which you did state.
"2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that."
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/L4SZadQsBAAJ
"At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax,
but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer."
Was my prediction correct?
Yes.
Will you deny I am right and *YOU* were wrong? Probably so.
I will show that you were not truthful in saying that I changed my mind after your post of 5-23-20, giving a URL which supposedly convinced me that Dawson was the likely hoaxer.

Look at my last post in "Two questions evolutionists never answer:Piltdown Man"

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/alt.atheism/subject$3ATwo$20AND$20subject$3Aquestions$20AND$20subject$3Aevolutionists$20AND$20subject$3Anever$20AND$20subject$3Aanswer$3APiltdown$20AND$20subject$3AMan/alt.atheism/p9zigFAPdHg

https://rb.gy/sn7fut

Look at my last post, third from the bottom post.

In it, I close with: "My personal opinion is that Charles Dawson was the hoaxer, and likely alone."

So you see that by that time, I was reasonably convinced that Dawson was the hoaxer.

Your URL was written May 23rd, 2020?

The phrase "My personal opinion..." was posted February 12th, 2014. Six years earlier than the post you claimed changed my mind.

Automatically bearing false witness, yet again.

So we see who the liar was, don't we? Not me. That only leaves one person.

You also wrote a couple of your posts above: "> I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that."

That's not a lie, I guess, but only your utter incompetence.


Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-26 16:24:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
On Monday, May 25, 2020 at 8:39:22 PM UTC-6,
And my no-nonsense question was: "1) According to you, did I decide that Dawson was the likely hoaxer, AFTER (my emphasis) I read the article you linked to on May 23rd, 2020?
And you refused to answer, knowing the truth, as you wrote earlier in this thread: Auto: "AFTER (my emphasis) I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it." So you plainly said mendaciously that I changed my mind to Dawson AFTER I read your article.
No, I stated the order of when you posted what you said publicly about it.
I did a search and can find no public statements by you on that specific thing, who did the piltdown fraud, at all before that.
1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article.
2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that.
Let's play hardball.
If you can prove 1) and 2), then I will be the liar, and you can publicly brand me as such. And I will publicly acknowledge that in this thread.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/hHzCFas_BAAJ
"After I posted a science journal article, your puppet says he changed his mind and now thinks the main suspected culprit of all time, who has a massive history of producing frauds, did it=
."
"1) You said I changed my mind and named Dawson AFTER I read your posted article."
No, I stated you typed you changed your mind after I posted the above url.
Which you did state.
"2) You claim that I did not name a hoaxer for the fraud before that."
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.atheism/poxJybmwxF0/L4SZadQsBAAJ
"At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax,
but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer."
Was my prediction correct?
Yes.
Will you deny I am right and *YOU* were wrong? Probably so.
I will show that you were not truthful in saying that I changed my mind after your post of 5-23-20
I never said that, you are being dishonest. I said you typed that you changed your mind after i made my post, which is accurate.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Look at my last post in "Two questions evolutionists never answer:Piltdown Man"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/alt.atheism/subject$3ATwo$20AND$20subject$3Aquestions$20AND$20subject$3Aevolutionists$20AND$20subject$3Anever$20AND$20subject$3Aanswer$3APiltdown$20AND$20subject$3AMan/alt.atheism/p9zigFAPdHg
https://rb.gy/sn7fut
Look at my last post, third from the bottom post.
In it, I close with: "My personal opinion is that Charles Dawson was the hoaxer, and likely alone."
So you see that by that time, I was reasonably convinced that Dawson was the hoaxer.
I didn't look up your other email. I did look up your current nym, and you didn't have anything posted about it.
Andrew
2020-05-26 05:11:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you have the guts or the gonads
to continue, and tell the truth?
Jesus is the One who can help you.
Lucifer
2020-05-26 05:52:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 25 May 2020 22:11:22 -0700, "Andrew"
Post by Andrew
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you have the guts or the gonads
to continue, and tell the truth?
Jesus is the One who can help you.
Can Jesus overcome God?
Christopher A. Lee
2020-05-26 11:07:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:52:36 +1000, Lucifer
Post by Lucifer
On Mon, 25 May 2020 22:11:22 -0700, "Andrew"
Post by Andrew
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you have the guts or the gonads
to continue, and tell the truth?
Jesus is the One who can help you.
Imbecile.
Post by Lucifer
Can Jesus overcome God?
Marvin Sebourn
2020-05-26 15:33:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you have the guts or the gonads
to continue, and tell the truth?
Jesus is the One who can help you.
Forget Jesus, for you do not follow many of his precepts given in your Bible.

Get back to your argument of why there was a global flood.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Automatic
2020-05-26 16:51:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Andrew
Jesus is the One who can help you.
Forget Jesus
I have it on good authority you happen to be in trouble with the local deity.
Oko tillo
2020-05-26 16:44:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
==
Post by Andrew
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you have the guts or the gonads
to continue, and tell the truth?
Jesus is the One who can help you.
I really think you ought to have someone take a look at that beam, Andrew.



Oko
%
2020-05-25 17:25:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Automatic
Post by Marvin Sebourn
At one time I thought that Martin A.C. Hinton was responsible for the hoax, but now I feel that Charles Dawson was the likely hoaxer.
And it only took you a century to realize you were wrong, (after I posted the journal article, mind you).
How long would ti take you to realize you are wrong about something you only imagined happened that actually never did occur?
then it would be like talking to you
Don Martin
2020-05-25 12:40:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 24 May 2020 20:35:56 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by Amazing Answers
Can you imagine being there in Britain when the evolutionists had tears of joy over the finding of Piltdown Man? Those welling, large tears of crocodile proportions came flowing from their eyes because the evolution 'scientists' found what they were looking for.
Can you imagine being there in the USA when Creationists wet their pants when the "existence" of man-tracks contemporary with dinosaurs was shown at the Paluxy River track site by Carl Baugh? Their bloated bladders releasing epic Noahic Floods of urine rivaling the Greatest Flood On Earth that came flowing because the Creationist believers found what they were looking for-evidence that humankind and dinosaurs were contemporaneous!
Post by Amazing Answers
"A few years after the discovery of the Mauer mandible, a spectacular discovery in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in the south of England hit headlines around the world. It consisted of fragments of a human skull with an ape-like lower jaw. Primitive stone tools as well as rhinoceros and elephant bone fragments were discovered alongside it. It seemed that the perfect missing link Darwin alluded to in his epochal oeuvre 40 years previously had finally been discovered. The outpouring of joy was tremendous because, at the height of Anglo-German rivalry in the period immediately preceding WWI, the British had outperformed the Germans, including in the field of human origin."
https://www.gesundheitsindustrie-bw.de/en/article/news/a-heidelberg-man-of-african-origin
The Creationists continued their river of gold when a few years ago, the famous fickle finger of fate came to grace the Baugh collection. And with that came the London Hammer, proof that miner's hammers were produced during dinosaur times.
Yes indeed, the Creationist believers had an outpouring of joy. Somewhat messy and odorous, as urine is likely to be, although this bounteous micturation was, of course, an outpouring of urine over several hoaxes.
Post by Amazing Answers
Yes, indeed, they had an outpouring of joy.
"Outpouring" scarcely describes the orgiastic outflow of the Creationists.
Post by Amazing Answers
Of course, it was an outpouring of joy over a hoax. Evolutionists, were easily fooled.
Of course, it was a hoax.
And years later, I have four or five books on the Piltdown Hoax. Written mostly by scientists or science writers. T can see about fifteen or twenty books in English addressing the Hoax.
But I see absolutely no books by Creationists mentioning the Paluxy Hoaxes.
I remember seeing a website by theists recognizing Paluxy et al as a hoax. Good for them.
Science discovers mistakes, correcting them and acknowledging them.
Creationism glosses over their mistakes, and ignores them. Likely repeats them.
They lie for their God.
They pretty much have to, since that entity seems to be universally
unavailable to do its own lying. Faith does not grow on trees, after
all.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Loading...