If Evolution has Proof, Why Make Fraudulent Proof?
In 1859, in his book Origin of the Species, Charles Darwin said:
Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.
This is from chapter six entitled Difficulties on the Theory. Scientists who believe evolution have been searching for transitional forms ever since but they have been not found. Therefore, fraudulent fossils have been made and presented as transitional forms.
National Geographic is the magazine of the National Geographic Society a scientific and educational institution according to their website. A fossil for a new find named Archaeoraptor was promoted in the National Geographic magazine as the missing link between dinosaur and birds. National Geographic later had to print a correction after further research revealed they had been fooled by the fraudulent fossil. Parts of two fossils, a dinosaur and a bird, had been glued together.
Piltdown Man was promoted as the missing link between ape and man. Piltdown Man was identified by a fossil skull. Piltdown Man was in science books and taught to children in school for almost 40 years before the skull was examined to see if it was authentic. When it was finally examined it was determined that the top of a human skull had been attached to the jaw of an orangutan. The phony fossil had been stained and painted to make it look old. For more information about Piltdown Man, please see this article: The Piltdown Man Fraud. For more information about the supposed missing links between apes and humans see the book:
Bones of Contention
Marvin L. Lubenow
Evolutionists believe that macro-evolution has been proven in the fossil record. However, if there is overwhelming evidence in the fossil record that macro-evolution has occurred then why is it necessary to make fraudulent fossils? The reason is because, contrary to what is commonly believed, macro-evolution has no proof in the fossil record.
The Peppered Moth
This is something that I was taught in science classes many times over the years. In this article entitled: What About The Peppered Moth? Dr. John Morris, Ph.D. describes it this way:
Here’s the well-told scenario. In the early 1800s, nearly all of the individual peppered moths (Biston betularia) were of a light grey, speckled color. Active mostly at night, they needed to hide by day from predatory birds. Since trees and rocks were typically covered with mottled light green, gray lichens, the moths were effectively camouflaged. A rare peppered moth exhibited a dark color and was easily seen by birds; thus they seldom survived. On average, over 98% of all the species were of the light variety, yet with both dark and light were of the same species and were fully interfertile.
Then came the industrial revolution and the air filled with soot, covering the trees and rocks with a toxic film, killing the lichens and darkening the trees. Soon the light variety of moth was easily seen while the darker were camouflaged. By the turn of the century, 98% of the moths were dark. When English medical doctor Bernard Kettlewell studied the phenomena in the 1950s, it became “Darwin’s Missing Evidence” natural selection in action. …
Several years ago, this study was found to be faked. Dr. Morris continues:
… And now comes the revelation that Kettlewell’s compelling argument has not been verified by other investigators (Nature, vol. 396, November 5, 1998, pp. 35,36). Furthermore, we now know that neither dark nor light moths ever spend their days on exposed tree trunks or rocks as depicted in the famous textbook pictures. His original associates have even admitted that the photographs were faked, that the moths were glued onto the tree. Thus the star witness for evolution has perjured itself, and knowledgeable evolutionists are recommending it not be used.
Even if this was a true study, all it would prove is that there was light and dark moths and then light and dark moths after the industrial revolution. Nothing evolved at all.
(This page is a work in progress. There is more fraudulent proof for evolution, but I have not finished this page yet.)