Was piltdown man, Java man, and all of the others a joke or not? Where is the scientific evidence of the theory of evolution?
2006-09-09 05:08:57 · 16 answers · asked by ? 6 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Do you understand the difference between a 'hoax' and a 'conspiracy'?
A 'hoax' involves only one or two people. Hoaxes happen all the time, and can fool people for a short period. But these don't last long in science because there is a huge reward structure (prizes, prestige, lectureships, jobs, etc.) for *exposing* hoaxes and none whatsoever for perpetrating them (it's one-way ticket to the dustbin of scientific history).
A 'consipiracy' involves a lot of people. The more people it involves, the harder it is to believe that all these people conspired together to perpetrate a lie. To call evolution a conspiracy would involve literally *hundreds of thousands of scientists*, over *150 years*, in fields as far apart as biology, geology, astrophysics, genetics, particle physics, radiology, medical research, etc., all to agree to perpetrate some fraud on the general public. There has *never* in human history, been a conspiracy even a fraction of that magnitude ... and there has never, in the history of science, been a case of a conspiracy even involving a few hundred scientists. Why would they? What would they have to gain?
Plus there is the fact that scientists make *lousy* conspirators. The very methods of science are contrary to secrecy. Everything is published. Everything is challenged by other scientists. Debates rage. Universities compete. Camps form. Nobel prizes hang in the balance. Conspiracies don't live long in that environment.
Piltdown man was a rare example of a deliberate hoax by (probably) a single man (exposed by scientists, by the way). Java man was not a deliberate 'hoax', but a genuine fossil find whose meaning has been debated. The vast vast majority of the *hundreds of thousands* of fossils, both human and non-human ... are not hoaxes.
As to "where is the scientific evidence?" ... people who ask that question have been soaking up the Creationist side of the debate, and specifically avoid any encounter with the scientific side of the debate (i.e. the HUGE amount of evidence) AT ALL ... i.e., you are not about to listen to any answers, so why bother asking?
I have written up lists of evidence too many times to do it again ... so I'll just join others in pointing people to this very good summary:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
2006-09-09 07:10:41 · answer #1 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is not a hoax. Darwin proposed the theory of evolution because he saw it as the only way to explain what he was observing in the natural world. He had extraordinary insight, because he proposed this theory based on the scientific knowledge of 150 years ago, which is barely anything compared to what we know now. We are 150 years passed Darwin, and evolution is so well supported that is is really considered to be scientific fact, rather than a debatable theory like it was back then. Everything we know about geology, biology, chemistry, physics, and DNA supports evolution. If it were a hoax, it would involve every scientist in the world that is in these fields, and what exactly would be gained by that? Scientists don't care what the truth is, they just want the truth. If there was any evidence that supported creation, then scientists would support creation. They don't because it doesn't fit the evidence. Every shred of scientific evidence we have supports evolution, and none of it supports anything else. There really aren't any alternatives.
2006-09-09 05:30:28 · answer #2 · answered by Nick Hahn 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Piltdown man was indeed a hoax, and some scientists believed in it. It took some time to prove it was indeed a hoax, but you must remember that many scientists were also sceptical about the whole thing. It didn't fit in with all the other observations. The Piltdown man was largely ignored until it was finally proven to be fake.
The scientific evidence for Evolution is there if you look for it. If you're serious, study biology yourself. Don't just accept some priest's word that there's no evidence, they may be men of God but they don't study Biology. And ask yourself, how do you prove things in science?
2006-09-09 10:45:44 · answer #3 · answered by ThePeter 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Piltdown man was definitely a hoax, and not a particularly good one at that. What it did show is that even scientists can be fooled if you show them what they want to see. We (the English) were so desperate to prove that we really were the cent re of the Universe and the cradle of civilisation that we allowed a French priest (Teilhard) to fool us for 30 years.
A half day trip to a museum, or if you are in the USA, a walk down to the bottom of the Grand Canyon looking at the fossils should prove to you that evolution is real.
If you want to come up an alternative, then produce TESTABLE evidence, that does not depend on a 2000 year old book, or a mythical being sat on a cloud going "Kerpow".
2006-09-09 05:40:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The scientific evidence for evolution is distributed throughout the literature and content of the natural sciences. The fact that the universe, the earth, and living things are all evolving is well-proven fact. All you need to do is read your biology textbook and listen to your class lectures.
You will not get beyond the first chapter without encountering evidence of evolution, and there are thousands of details about the observed world that cannot be explained except by evolutionary doctrine.
By the way, the word "theory" as in "theory of evolution," is not used in science the same way we use it in everyday conversation. We say things like, "I have a theory as to why Ellen left her husband." In that sense, "theory" means "speculation," or "guesswork."
In science, however, "theory" means "a body of related facts, data, and explanations that explain cogently some observed phenomenon or effect in the known world." In other words, scientific theory is organized facts.
So evidence of evolution is distributed throughout natural science, and people who want to argue about it really need to get a life--or at least a fun hobby.
Piltdown man was a hoax--a giant skeleton made of plaster by a sculptor and then "dug up" by some adventurers. I don't remember about Java Man, but you can use an internet search box as well as I can. Look it up.
2006-09-09 05:24:16 · answer #5 · answered by aviophage 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
As someone said earlier, it is just a theory. However, I'm pretty sure Darwin's theory or evolution is pretty widely accepted in the scientific community. As to whether or not it's a hoax, I'm not the one to decide.
It seems fairly believable and evidence, such as observations over time, fossils, and carbon dating, can explain some of the questions. However, there are still some missing parts that haven't been explained yet. I guess it's up to you to be the "decider", as President Bush would say. Who knows, maybe an alien species had something to do with it.
2006-09-09 05:18:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Java man is no hoax; I don't know why you say it is. That's a new one. Piltdown was, and was discovered to be so through science.
If you really believe Darwinism as a whole is a "hoax", you're talking about a conspiracy on a ridiculously large scale, involving hundreds of thousands of scientists! Are you really THAT paranoid?
If you're specifically interested in hominid fossils:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/
On this page, check out figure 1.4.4
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#pred4
2006-09-09 07:16:08 · answer #7 · answered by Zhimbo 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
in all probability by using fact Darwin got here up with the mechanism via which evolution works (or a minimum of the organic determination area). a extensive variety of scientists contained in the early nineteenth century found out that evolution would desire to happen, by using fact there's a lot evidence of it contained in the fossil checklist and in anatomy and taxonomy. they only weren't constructive the way it worked. Darwin supplied a mind-blowing and stylish concept, alongside with huge documented evidence to back it up. maximum persons of working earth and organic and organic scientists flocked to the reason by using fact it substitute into of course appropriate.
2016-09-30 12:27:06 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not a theory!!!!!The evidence for evolution is overwhelming!!!!just becuase some things turn out to be hoaxes,doesn't mean all of it is.
2006-09-09 05:30:53 · answer #9 · answered by That one guy 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is not a hoax.
Creationists want you to believe it is a hoax because they can offer no alternative scientific explanation.
The link below explains the basics for the evidence. Further links are included if you wish to enrich your understanding...
2006-09-09 05:15:27 · answer #10 · answered by Dastardly 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋