If the fossil record goes against your evidence, deny they exist. If some one points the fossil record out, claim they or are not what they actually are.
This is what creationists do. The fossil record is strong evidence for evolution and it large.
Piltdown man: It was a hoax, this is true. This was not uncovered by creationists, it was scientists[1]. Even before that Pildown man didn't fit with the rest of the fossil recored, before the hoax was revealed it was like having a peace of a puzzle that did not go with the puzzle you are putting together, it didn't fit anywhere.[2].
Nebraska Man: Creationists claim that scientists constructed Nebraska Man from a single tooth complete with an illustration of a family of them, a tooth that turned out to be a pig. No. The illustration was never published in any scientific journal. The tooth was initially unidentified and few if any scientists said it was from human family tree. It was later identified as a tooth from a pig[3].
Lucy: "Lucy was a chimpanzee!" Nope. Lucy is the most well known specimen of australopithecus afarensis but it is not the only one. There are at least 29 other specimens[4]. There are significant differences between australopithecus afarensis (including Lucy) and chimpanzees; the humerofemoral ratio (length of humerus divided by length of femur) of australopithecus afarensis is 84.6, a chimpanzees is 97.8[5]. Her hip joints are more akin to that of a humans than that of a chimpanzee[6].
Neanderthals: "The Neanderthal fossil was just a man with rickets" Which one? There have been many Neanderthal fossils found. There are significant differences between humans and Neanderthals. Neanderthals are shorter than humans, with thicker bones, slightly sloping face with predominant brow ridges, small chin and a slightly larger brain case[7]. To make things worse for the creationists; scientists have sequenced the Neanderthal genome[8] and we are not the same species.
© 2009 all rights reserved
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.




















