A LESSON IN THROWING THE BULL
Sat Jul 27 19:16:18 EST 1996
> The latest edition of ``Nature," the so-called respected journal,
> rolled off the press today and once again it features a story that
> really should have appeared in a child's book of fairy tales.
> Yet the editors at the Allentown (Pa.) Morning Call -- same as those
> at newspapers across the continent -- made it a sound like it was
> based on solid fact by deciding it warranted a glowing -- but totally
> erroneous -- headline:
> > FOSSIL FIND ILLUMINATES
> > MAN'S APE ANCESTOR
> > Discovery helps fill gaps in what happened
> > to humanity's ancestors between about 18
> > million and 5 million years ago
> The article describes the discovery in Turkey of ``a fossil ape face"
> by a team of anthropologists and researchers who call it
> ankarapithecus meteai, a 60-pound, fruit-eating ape.
> Without any basis in fact, they refer to it as ``a cousin" of man and
> say it will tell us more than we now know about the common ancestor of
> humans and the great apes (which is absolute zero).
> The article even quoted bullshit artist David Pilbeam of Harvard
> University as saying, ``There are so few specimens that are as
> complete as this," adding that the discovery makes ``a significant
> increment in our knowledge."
> It seems only fiiting and proper to resurrect the heads-on quotation
> which shined like a beacon in ``The Velikovsky Affair: The Warfare
> Between Science and Scientism" . . .
> > ``The easiest ploy is to impress upon editors
> > that only scientists -- and preferably selected
> > members of the establishment -- are competent
> > to judge scientific theories. And, since science
> > is an important source of news of interest to
> > the general public, editors are not inclined to
> > reject such advice."
The author of "a lesson in throwing the bull" is apparently one of those people
who doesn't understand the origins and structure of life on earth. Yes, the
discovery is one of our distant but dead and extinct cousins. Genetics
demonstrates and confirms quite adequately that we are closely related to the
great apes (and little ones too). I know of the "same creator same design
argument". The argument falls apart with the pseudo or non-functioning genes.
You can say same creator-design-gene, but why make non-functioning genes and
why make them alike.
Get a little tolerance going there. After all, the apes must exist that
with the knowledge that they are related to such things as Ronald Reagan, Rush
Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, etc,
More information about the Mol-evol