Evolutionists: Why have some true Human fossils been discovered in the wrong strata?

Question

British Anthropologists Sir Arthur Keith in his book, The Antiquity of Man, described these and other like fossil man finds in detail and stated that they would have been readily accepted by scientists if it were not for the fact that these fossils, because of their locations in the strata, contradicted the accepted theory of evolution.

Examples: Calaveras, Castenedolo, and Olmo skulls.

Answer 1

Amen. That's what I say. Have you heard of the dinosaur's footprints found in the same layer of sediment as a humans in a dried up riverbed?

Answer 2

You (human) from a prevalent ancestor with apes 5 million years in the previous or so, by way of on the least 10 intermediate species. helpful, this is a shown actuality of "macro" evolution. despite if or no longer you're taking transport of it or now no longer. The fossil and genetic information are overwhelming in exhibiting it precise. you will discover the "references" in the approximately 26,549 peer-reviewed medical papers released in medical journals over the previous 30 years or so on the section (and many many hundreds and hundreds greater earlier that). they're no longer on the internet, you will could desire to the two join them or study them in a classes laboratory. , make some attempt and circulate be knowledgeable some element. Or is that too much to ask, and you will besides the undeniable fact that sit down around and be lazy and declare an imaginary god for which there isn't any information of any kind did the entire element in the past 6,000 years? Peace.

Answer 3

Good old Doctor Morris is up to his old tricks again is he. The man really does know better but he just can not help himself.
--------------------------------------------------------
The Castendolo bones belong to skeletons of several men, women, and children. They are a recent burial in Pliocene sediments, evidenced by the fact that other fossils but not the human bones were impregnated with salt.

The Olmo skull is from upper Pleistocene gravel, placing it in the Upper Paleolithic (Stone Age) period. It is not out of place.

The Calaveras skull was a deliberate hoax and was immediately recognized as such by scientists (Conrad 1982).
Links:

Answer 4

if they were found in the wrong strata, it makes sense that the our idea of what strata theire supposed to belong to... reajusting a theory is common practice in the scientific community.

just because native man did not take the same route in that period we expected. around the world as we previously suspected, does not implicate a whole theory is flawed.

keep in mind that in the history, many fraudulent skulls of ancient man have been found aswell, archeologists faking monkey skulls to look like a mans for fame and glory was not uncommon in the 1900's

new facts are discovered, sometimes theories are overthrown, sometimes theyre ajusted. many missing links have been found, many still remain to have to be found. the fact is we know the mechanism of evolution works, we havnt quite yet concluded the route it took.

youre kind of comparing knowing how a car works, and knowing how to drive to detroit.

Answer 5

How odd that a "scientist" (I put the quotation marks there for a reason) would say that. there is an accepted general theory of evolution but it is constantly changing. It changes as our knowledge increases. This theory is just a theory, not a velief system. Most of us beliee it is approaching the correct answers, but we are well aware that we have a ways to go.

Answer 6

You can have it one way or the other, but not both. Either scientists are too willing to adjust their theories in keeping with new evidence, and are therefore unreliable compared with the certainty of scripture, or they doggedly stick to their pre-existing ideas and suppress any challenge to the status quo. Well here's the news: we're proud of the first one.

Keith complains that other scientists aren't taking his work seriously. Of the possibilities open to you, do you want to make a guess as to whether this is because a) other scientists, every single damned one of them with reputations to keep or build, ganged up against this lone voice or b) Keith is wrong and wasn't as good a scientist as the ones looking at and evaluating his work?

I make no prejudgement, I leave that to you, Gilbert.

Answer 7

Easy. Here's an example. Serpentine rock only occurs in scattered outcrops in certain regions of the world. However, there is a serpentine rock sitting in the bushes near my folks house (which is built on granite). So how did that ancient serpentine rock get there?

I put it there!

Don't underestimate the power of early humans and/or animals (never mind weird weather events) to move fossils into the wrong strata.

.

Answer 8

Why do creationists on one hand say that science can't explain God whenever the overwhelming majority of scientific evidence disproves God's existance, creation or whatever and then whenever science says something that possibly upholds religious dogma they trumpet it from the highest.

You can't have it both ways! It's either faith or science. Don't argue from both sides.

Also, being that Keith published that book in 1915, and that science has since moved on a great deal, don't you think that you need to update your facts a bit?

Answer 9

I am a believer in evolution, but one fused pair of chromosome does NOT account for a difference of two. It would only account for a difference of one.

Try this: place 48 pennies (or any other available object) on your table. Count the piles. Now place one of the pennies, or whatever you are using on top of one other one. Count the piles again. You will have 47, not 46!

Answer 10

The strata move around. The earth's crust shifts. There are faults lines that create movement in the strata.

Answer 11

You quote Keith, proponent and possible co-conspirator of the Piltdown Man Hoax? An anatomist dead for over 60 years is the most recent you can come up with? His problems have LONG since been answered. Try again.