2007-11-17 10:32:51 · 7 answers · asked by Jack 5 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man are discarded pieces of bad data. *No* scientist has used them as evidence of evolution for decades.
The only thing they prove is that science is able to detect bad data and discard it. Both of these cases were exposed ... *by scientists*.
The only people who still bring them up are creationists. Why? Because if you can't refute the literally hundreds of thousands of fossils in the fossil record, might as resurrect Piltdown, which hasn't been mentioned in a single scientific paper supporting evolution since 1953, or Nebraska Man, that hasn't been part of science since 1925!
That's a key difference between scientists and creationists:
* Scientists discard bad data.
* Creationists enshrine it.
2007-11-17 10:53:53 · answer #1 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
in my view, because many Creationists that i comprehend have self belief that evolution befell after a component, I dont' think of it might remember. Creationists have self belief that a ultimate Being (God or in spite of) created the heavens and the earth and the inhabitants. whilst asked the place we come from, Evolutinoists say that's the theory of Origion, and not area of the Evolution theory. as a result, why won't be ready to the two be actual? God/ultimate Being made the international and evolution befell after residing issues have been created? As suggested, i comprehend many creationists (christian and pagan) who help this theory. i won't be ready to locate a single evolutionist who's keen to even think of roughly it. hence asserting, if Evolution grew to become into shown stunning, no biggie. If Creationism grew to become into shown stunning, I see many "evolutionists" starting to be disillusioned and denying each and every thing.
2016-12-09 00:34:34 · answer #2 · answered by holguin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are using Piltdown Man and Nebraske Man to argue against creationists, you need to get better more up-to-date and not falsified information.
And, pay attention to what secretsauce has said.
2007-11-17 12:35:28 · answer #3 · answered by Joan H 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All they demonstrate is the soundness of the scientific method to detect errors.
2007-11-17 10:49:32 · answer #4 · answered by novangelis 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
who has?
What piltdown and nebraska dudes?
most of scientific evidence is against evolution, even the examples supporting it are out-of-date, flawed, and down right false
2007-11-17 10:39:05 · answer #5 · answered by Arisimay 2 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Who created them?
2007-11-17 10:39:02 · answer #6 · answered by messinger1965 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesnt either support it or disprove it, its a red herring.
2007-11-17 10:55:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋