<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Maldives Science Society commemorates Darwin Day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/</link>
	<description>Knowledge through mathematical and empirical enquiry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:31:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Prof. Bruno Mex</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1020</link>
		<dc:creator>Prof. Bruno Mex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencemaldives.org/?p=430#comment-1020</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s not split hairs here; we all know that it was Darwin&#039;s &#039;On the Origin of Species&#039; that really brought to the attention of the whole world the concept of evolution _ he rocked the boat on such a massive scale. Darwin never said that a frog can turn into an ant [although even that is not inconceivable!]. There is a difference between a species becoming another EXISTING species and a species becoming a NEW species over millions of years of evolution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s not split hairs here; we all know that it was Darwin&#8217;s &#8216;On the Origin of Species&#8217; that really brought to the attention of the whole world the concept of evolution _ he rocked the boat on such a massive scale. Darwin never said that a frog can turn into an ant [although even that is not inconceivable!]. There is a difference between a species becoming another EXISTING species and a species becoming a NEW species over millions of years of evolution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vidar</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/comment-page-1/#comment-996</link>
		<dc:creator>vidar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:05:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencemaldives.org/?p=430#comment-996</guid>
		<description>I can remember as a child flicking through the pages of National Geographic Magazines. I didn&#039;t realize at the time, that I was filling my mind full with the evolution myth. Recently, we have seen another example of the evolution hoax being publicized in beautiful living color on excellent quality glossy pages.

Because the popular media likes to publish exiting stories, and because some scientists like to enjoy speculating about how far their discoveries might go, it has been difficult for the public to separate fact from conjecture. To find real evidence you have to dig to the journals and books published by the scientific community itself. The scientific literature reports experiments firsthand, and reports are generally free of the flights of fancy that make their way into the spinoffs that follows.

In an attempt to further their careers and justify the claims that evolution is a legitimate theory, many scientists have fraudulently deceived the world by planting or reconstructing fossils which they would claim to be authentic finds. The most widely published evolution fraud was committed in China in 1999, and published in in the National Geographic. The scientific community are not to proud to publish their faults, thats why we rarely hear about them. This leave the public in general with a wrong understanding of what is going on.

Piltdown man: Found in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1912, this fossil was considered by some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the evolution of man—until it was found to be a complete forgery 41 years later. The skull was found to be of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the appearance of age, and the teeth had been filed down!


Nebraska Man from the Illustrated London NewsNebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig.


Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his &quot;missing link&quot;). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52)


Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. (source: &quot;Skull fragment may not be human&quot;, Knoxville News-Sentinel, 1983)


Neanderthal: Still synonymous with brutishness, the first Neanderthal remains were found in France in 1908. Considered to be ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging, much of the evidence now suggests that Neanderthal was just as human as us, and his stooped appearance was because of arthritis and rickets. Neanderthals are now recognized as skilled hunters, believers in an after-life, and even skilled surgeons, as seen in one skeleton whose withered right arm had been amputated above the elbow. (source: &quot;Upgrading Neanderthal Man&quot;, Time Magazine, May 17, 1971, Vol. 97, No. 20)



Haekel’s EmbryosHaekel’s faked embryonic drawings

The theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860’s, promoting Darwin’s theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, &quot;Fraud Rediscovered&quot;, Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51)

Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis ModelArchaeoraptor Liaoningensis:
Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor

The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate.

&quot;Feathers For T-Rex?&quot;, Christopher P. Sloan, National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pp.99,100,105

Interesting Quote - &quot;National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism&quot; Storrs L. Olson, Smithsonian Institution</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can remember as a child flicking through the pages of National Geographic Magazines. I didn&#8217;t realize at the time, that I was filling my mind full with the evolution myth. Recently, we have seen another example of the evolution hoax being publicized in beautiful living color on excellent quality glossy pages.</p>
<p>Because the popular media likes to publish exiting stories, and because some scientists like to enjoy speculating about how far their discoveries might go, it has been difficult for the public to separate fact from conjecture. To find real evidence you have to dig to the journals and books published by the scientific community itself. The scientific literature reports experiments firsthand, and reports are generally free of the flights of fancy that make their way into the spinoffs that follows.</p>
<p>In an attempt to further their careers and justify the claims that evolution is a legitimate theory, many scientists have fraudulently deceived the world by planting or reconstructing fossils which they would claim to be authentic finds. The most widely published evolution fraud was committed in China in 1999, and published in in the National Geographic. The scientific community are not to proud to publish their faults, thats why we rarely hear about them. This leave the public in general with a wrong understanding of what is going on.</p>
<p>Piltdown man: Found in a gravel pit in Sussex England in 1912, this fossil was considered by some sources to be the second most important fossil proving the evolution of man—until it was found to be a complete forgery 41 years later. The skull was found to be of modern age. The fragments had been chemically stained to give the appearance of age, and the teeth had been filed down!</p>
<p>Nebraska Man from the Illustrated London NewsNebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig.</p>
<p>Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his &#8220;missing link&#8221;). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52)</p>
<p>Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. (source: &#8220;Skull fragment may not be human&#8221;, Knoxville News-Sentinel, 1983)</p>
<p>Neanderthal: Still synonymous with brutishness, the first Neanderthal remains were found in France in 1908. Considered to be ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging, much of the evidence now suggests that Neanderthal was just as human as us, and his stooped appearance was because of arthritis and rickets. Neanderthals are now recognized as skilled hunters, believers in an after-life, and even skilled surgeons, as seen in one skeleton whose withered right arm had been amputated above the elbow. (source: &#8220;Upgrading Neanderthal Man&#8221;, Time Magazine, May 17, 1971, Vol. 97, No. 20)</p>
<p>Haekel’s EmbryosHaekel’s faked embryonic drawings</p>
<p>The theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860’s, promoting Darwin’s theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, &#8220;Fraud Rediscovered&#8221;, Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51)</p>
<p>Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis ModelArchaeoraptor Liaoningensis:<br />
Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor</p>
<p>The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate.</p>
<p>&#8220;Feathers For T-Rex?&#8221;, Christopher P. Sloan, National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pp.99,100,105</p>
<p>Interesting Quote &#8211; &#8220;National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism&#8221; Storrs L. Olson, Smithsonian Institution</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rick</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/comment-page-1/#comment-995</link>
		<dc:creator>rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencemaldives.org/?p=430#comment-995</guid>
		<description>you ought to commemorate Mendel&#039;s day, as he is the real father of biology, not darwin.

&quot;Darwin&#039;s and Mendel&#039;s works contradict each other. Darwin taught that there were no limits to biological variation and that, if given enough time, a fish could evolve into a human being. Mendel, on the other hand, showed that there are natural limits to biological variations. Variations within biological kinds (such as varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) are possible but not variations across biological kinds, especially from simpler kinds to more complex ones. Mendel showed that evolution is limited to within the &quot;kinds&quot;. Mendel&#039;s works were not understood until thirty years after Darwin published &quot;The Origin of Species&quot;. If Darwin had known about Mendel&#039;s work he would never written his book on the origin of species.&quot; for more:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/107100-0/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you ought to commemorate Mendel&#8217;s day, as he is the real father of biology, not darwin.</p>
<p>&#8220;Darwin&#8217;s and Mendel&#8217;s works contradict each other. Darwin taught that there were no limits to biological variation and that, if given enough time, a fish could evolve into a human being. Mendel, on the other hand, showed that there are natural limits to biological variations. Variations within biological kinds (such as varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) are possible but not variations across biological kinds, especially from simpler kinds to more complex ones. Mendel showed that evolution is limited to within the &#8220;kinds&#8221;. Mendel&#8217;s works were not understood until thirty years after Darwin published &#8220;The Origin of Species&#8221;. If Darwin had known about Mendel&#8217;s work he would never written his book on the origin of species.&#8221; for more:<br />
<a href="http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/107100-0/" rel="nofollow">http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/107100-0/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yaamyn</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencemaldives.org/2010/02/maldives-science-society-commemorates-darwin-day/comment-page-1/#comment-983</link>
		<dc:creator>yaamyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencemaldives.org/?p=430#comment-983</guid>
		<description>Darwin&#039;s contribution has been such a challenge to established norms of ignorance, that its repercussions are still felt today.

Out of pure academic curiosity, do they teach the theory of Evolution in Maldivian schools?

I have asked around, but have heard the answer both ways.

And happy Darwin&#039;s day! ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darwin&#8217;s contribution has been such a challenge to established norms of ignorance, that its repercussions are still felt today.</p>
<p>Out of pure academic curiosity, do they teach the theory of Evolution in Maldivian schools?</p>
<p>I have asked around, but have heard the answer both ways.</p>
<p>And happy Darwin&#8217;s day! <img src='http://www.sciencemaldives.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
