Our Websites

Journey to Peru—Day Three

Candelabra

After a few hours of sleep, we began our day with a piece of bread and some instant coffee for breakfast. (Not complaining; it was complimentary!) We took the opportunity this morning to see one of the tourist attractions by chartering a boat to take us out across the Paracas Bay to the Isle de Ballestos, an island just off the coast of Pisco. The Paracas people lived there from 1300 B.C to 300 A.D. and they made the most famous textiles in the world.  Because of the dry climate in Peru, these textiles are remarkably preserved today. This area is most known for the Candelabra, a massive 650-foot-tall and 310-feet-wide image in the side of one of the islands that has been dug some 6 to 7 feet deep into the surface. Today there are some questions as to the meaning of this formation and, therefore, several different theories as to what purpose it served. The guide described a few of these concepts ranging from ocean navigation lines to a symbol of worship so that the gods would bless their plants. Personally, I think it was a fabulous waterslide that the pre-Columbian people used ;-)

Isle De Ballestos

With the speedboat at a nice cruising pace, we made it to the islands in about 20 minutes. These islands once made Peru a world power simply because of the guano (bird poop) that was used as fertilizer, harvested off the rocks of the island. With more than 110 species of birds on the island, including the red boobies, pelicans, turkey vultures, and red-footed cormorants, this was quite a sight, as there were literally hundreds of thousands of birds on the islands. This explained where all the guano was produced!

Ica Stones

After our expedition to the Ballestos islands our day got really exciting! In Ica Peru there is a private collection of Ica burial stones that were procured by a medical doctor named Dr. Cabrera over the past several decades, and we were about to get a private tour of these famous stones from Dr. Cabrera’s daughter Eugenia who has taken over his work since his death in 2006.  This collection consists of over 11,000 artifacts that today would be considered priceless. These stones are pre-Incan artifacts made by the Ica people who lived in this area from around 300 BC to 800 AD. We did some investigation of these stones to determine if there was a patena layer around them. Patena is the oxidized coating that develops on artifacts over a long period of time. Scientists study this to determine things like the authenticity of age or antiquity. Using a portable proscope, a portable microscope that magnifies images up to 200 times, Dr. Swift was able to confirm the authenticity of these stones, observing the patena layer both on the black of the stones as well as on the white lines that form the drawings.   This was an important find because modern skeptics of these stones claim that they were carved recently by a farmer who has admitted in a police report to making the stones to sell them.  The problem with this skepticism is that they have found over 11,000 of these stones, that’s a lot of work for a man running a farm, not to mention the carvings that are on these stones depict information that the farmer would have had no idea about. These burial stones depict brain surgery, c-sections, using magnification and telescopes, maps of coastal seas, and animals that are both alive today and many that seem to be extinct.  Take a look at these photos to see for yourself.

I can’t wait to see what tomorrow will bring. More to come….

Photo Gallery

,

Leave29 Responses to testJourney to Peru—Day Three

  1. John Bebbington April 11, 2011 at 7:01 am #

    This collection consists of over 11,000 artifacts that today would be considered priceless.

    What does that mean? Are they priceless or are they not? My guess is not.

    The problem with this skepticism is that they have found over 11,000 of these stones, that’s a lot of work for a man running a farm, ….

    “They” have found? Who are “they”?

    But not too many for just one man to have found lying around the place? If it was so easy to find them why is so difficult for the “scientific expedition” to find any more?

    ……….not to mention the carvings that are on these stones depict information that the farmer would have had no idea about.

    Why – has printed material not reached that part of the world? Why could he not have known of such things?

    • CSE April 11, 2011 at 10:02 am #

      John:

      “… that today would be considered priceless…” means that they would sell for a very high dollar amount if sold at auction, but their value to history and science is priceless.

      “… they…” are those that have discovered Ica Stones.

      It’s not too many for someone to find in one place because they may have been made by many people over time. (I say “may have” because we have not personally observed the tribal peoples of Peru actually making them, so to say how many people made them would be a guess.)

      With the dating of these stones being 4,000 years ago, then no, printed material had not reached those people to inform them of “dinosaurs”.

  2. John Bebbington April 11, 2011 at 11:05 am #

    CSE,

    Thank you for the reply.

    … that today would be considered priceless…” means that they would sell for a very high dollar amount if sold at auction, but their value to history and science is priceless.

    Assuming, that is, that they are all genuine. The more interesting ones (from your point of view) are the those showing “dinosaurs” and telesopes, etc. Particularly interesting is the graving of a man flying a pterodactyl. Some skills those guys had.

    It’s not too many for someone to find in one place because they may have been made by many people over time.

    That was not my point which is that only a few people seem to have found them and that they are either still being manufactured or found (because the stones continue to be sold) for the easy bamboozlement of passing “scientific expeditions”.

    …..then no, printed material had not reached those people to inform them of “dinosaurs”.
    </blockquote

    That's not what I meant. Please read the story again. Eric wrote to the effect that the farmer couldn't have carried out the hoax because he would have had no knowledge of the various items depicted on the stones. Clearly, he did have such information and could, together with the help of his foxy neighbours, produced the stones over time.

    Which is more likely – a hoax or that an ancient people had advanced technological knowledge but spent its time scratching pictures on stones?

  3. Danny April 11, 2011 at 4:32 pm #

    FOR JOHN BEBBINGTON from “Happy Atheists Day”

    John BebbingtonApril 7th at 12:18 pm
    Danny,
    Your quoting of Matthews (published in 1972 and not 1971, by the way) is as brazen a piece of creationist quote-mining as me stating that the musselman’s familiar mantra proclaims that “There is no God”.
    Matthews was an out-and-out evolutionist and when the Arkansas creation trial came up the defendant’s lawyer wanted to call Matthews to give evidence for the creationist side based upon that partial quote. However, Matthews wrote a letter to the lawyer telling him in no uncertain terms exactly what his thoughts were on the matter of evolution as a result of which the lawyer had second thoughts. Matthews was not called.
    Why you and your fellows constantly practice this dishonest quote-mining is beyond me. Jesus must be be ashamed of you all. Perhaps thunder isn’t the result of lightning but heavenly face-palming.

    You used this same “logic” with me quite a while back when I quoted David Darling’ He said,
    “What is a big deal-the biggest deal of all-is how you get something out of nothing. “Don’t let the cosmologists try to kid you on this one. They have not got a clue either-despite the fact that they are doing a pretty good job of convincing themselves and others that this is really not a problem. ‘In the beginning,’ they will say, ‘there was nothing-no time, space, matter or energy. Then there was a quantum fluctuation from which …’ Whoa! Stop right there. You see what I mean? First there is nothing, then there is something. And the cosmologists try to bridge the two with a quantum flutter, a tremor of uncertainty that sparks it all off. Then they are away and before you know it, they have pulled a hundred billion galaxies out of their quantum hats.”
    Also on p. 49
    “You cannot fudge this by appealing to quantum mechanics. Either there is nothing to begin with, in which case there is no quantum vacuum, no pre-geometric dust, no time in which anything can happen, no physical laws that can effect a change from nothingness into somethingness; or there is something, in which case that needs explaining.”

    Darling, David, “On Creating Something from Nothing,” New Scientist, vol. 151 (September 14, 1996). p. 49

    You accused me of saying that David Darling was a Creationist. I NEVER said that BUT he was showing the evolution doesn’t have an arm to swing on, no proof whatsoever. They cannot explain how something came from nothing. I agreed that he was still an evolutionist, he just knows that it is a religion that he is stuck with, so to speak. It helps him to keep his job, family, etc. Did you watch “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed”? You would know better where I am coming from.
    I also noticed that you said in the above paragraph that Jesus would be ashamed of Christians for quote mining. Just as in the physical there could be riches in gold mining, there is riches in quote mining. Just show us where the evolutionists lied. I don’t believe that you are concerned whether Jesus cared about quote mining or not since you speak as if it is a sin. It probably is to you since you can’t answer the quotes except by getting off the issues and bringing up a different one hoping the issue dealt with will be forgotten. It won’t happen with me. I quoted it accurately and in context. Show me the problems or the untruth, get you focus off the poople and deal with the issues.

    Then in my recent post I said,
    “I could talk for hours about all the things the Lord has done for me and in me since I have received him. And I will if you would like me to. My phone number is on my website, give me a call.”
    You replied with,

    “So what about all the bad things, Danny? And I know a little of your private life because you have written about it. Are your misfortunes mainly your fault? Is your peculiarly intense form of religiosity a cause, do you think? As a husband and father are you a bit of pain to be around? Are you as effectively locked up inside your mind as Kent is in his prison because of an inability to consider that perhaps you may be even ” Are you really a Godly person or just another zealot? And like that young Amish fellow, is there a text in the Bible for every opinion which you already hold?
    If any of the above is true, why should I listen to anything you have to say? If everything is a done deal there’s no further point in talking.”
    I will answer the above questions. You asked me about the bad things happening in my life now. Not anywhere did I say that God will not allow bad things to happen in a believer’s life. I didn’t receive him so I could tip toe through the tulips all my life with no problems. I received him because I knew that I needed him, that I was a sinner and he died to free me from sin.
    You asked are my misfortunes my fault? I could say yes to some of them and no to others. Job was a perfect and upright man, one who eschewed evil yet he went through all kinds of garbage. God allows the evil one to mess with us at times so we can better see where we are in our walk with him. The word puts it this way in the New Testament. Reading Rom 15:4
    “4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.”
    Here God is telling his people to read and study what happened to his people in olden times so we might better understand what is happening to us today.
    Based on your comment about everything being “a done deal”. Things change continually. For the sake of space, please read I Sam 23:1-13 and really THINK about what you are reading. In this chapter we see that King David is asking God will Saul come with his men to capture him in Keilah. God told him that they would come down and take him and the people of Keilah will tell Saul where he is hiding. SO David and his men leave Keilah and Saul finds out they left so he DOES NOT go down to Keilah. BUT God told David they would come down and the men of Keilah will tell them were David and his men are hiding. SO David leaves Keilah. DID God lie? No, he just answered David’s questions. David leaves so Saul would not find him since he was not there to be found. If Christians really seek the face of God more there would be a lot less problems in their lives. Enough of that for now.

    John, in answer to another part, I will say that I get my information from an all knowing God and you get your information from nothing that became something magically yet really knows nothing, attributing this incredibly complex universe with blind random chance and our smartest minds cannot figure out much of anything to speak of about this so-called accident.
    I asked you about the online book and you once again decided it wasn’t worth reading because it was written by a 7 Day Adventist. I do KNOW that 7th Day Adventist is a cult and I reject much of what they say as a religious system but I won’t negate scientific evidence based on facts because I don’t care for their religion.
    That is why I hate religion, it is the cause of many, many wars, death, disease and the like whether we are talking about evolution or 7th Day Adventists or Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons and many others such as Roman Catholics who would love to keep people in the Dark Ages since they were in control of most of the known world through murder, lies, and force.
    You said that you didn’t like his nothingness comment condensing into a single tiny dot and decided to explode. I showed you again using David Darling that evolutionists believe it Since you talked like he was speaking total nonsense in regards to what evolutionists believe then you tell me. I am all ears. Tell me what you think of the big bang and where life came from, etc. AND if you do NOT know then don’t be jumping down creationists’ throats because they want you to know.

    Ekkman

  4. Danny April 11, 2011 at 4:38 pm #

    CoreyApril 7th at 9:49 am
    @Danny
    My quote was based on the fact that Eric is using an ad hominem argument by quoting the Bible saying anyone does not believe in God, has no heart.
    I can give several quotations:
    “A fool and his money are soon parted.”
    “Who is more foolish: the fool or the fool who follows the fool?”
    “Can the blind lead the blind?”
    Does these help an argument on whether God is real or creation or evolution is science or religion?
    On a side note, I was watching Man On The Moon, a film about Andy Kaufman. Andy was a comedian and prankster who loved to fool his audience.
    After finding out he had lung cancer, he tried different New Age medicines and went to Phillipines to have psychic surgery. He realized that he was being tricked.
    There have been similiar instances of Christians who do not seek medicial treatment and believe that God will heal them. This has lead to children dying from curable illnesses and their parents being charged.

    @Corey,
    There is a few things to talk about here. You said that Eric was saying that evolutionists have no heart by using the fool illustration, I guess. Fools can have a heart not much in the mind realm though. Anyone who “believes” that this universe came into existence on its’ own is either stupid or blind. I prefer to use the blind illustration since I believe some of them have a mind, but it is put in neutral, not being used. They take whatever the Ph.D’s give them as fact without so much as a question to the contrary.??? Speaking of that, Who would you say knows the most, a Ph.D creationist or a Ph.D evolutionist? THAT QUESTION IS FOR YOU TOO JOHN BEBBINGTON. I will give my thoughts on it after I hear the answer from you and John.
    I just finished writing to John dealing with his comments and most of the time they are directed at the people instead of the issues since he cannot answer the issue, he deals with the people such as “I am embarrassing myself” or “Jesus wouldn’t like it when we quote mine” or other junk like that. I will await his reply.
    I have had God heal me time and time again in totally supernatural ways that is really above comprehension. I personally would rather trust God for my healing and die than trust a doctor with my healing and die. You probably would think that strange so sorry if it disturbs you . There are tons of people and I am talking probably in the millions who are dead from trusting doctors. If that is where your faith is at then have at it but I can’t. I have been to a doctor once in the last 25 years and I was messed up more. I went to a dentist once and once again, he messed up too. That was my two experiences with doctors in the last 25 years but as I said before God Almighty cured me in incredible ways time and time again in the last 25 years. Jesus said in Mark 9:34 “ And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.” Tying in Heb 11:6, we read, “6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”
    I trust God, believe God, have faith in him, hence I go to him for my healing, my needs, my hopes and my dreams. He is God and I NEED no other in the absolute sense of the word. Go to my website and go to one of my last preaching videos where I preach on our ‘Absolute Need” so you can see where I am coming from on that issue.

    Ekkman

  5. Danny April 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm #

    By the way, on some of the shorter posts as I am typing, probably too fast for my own good at times. I send it over somehow accidently. Forgive me if you read one of them and they don’t seem to make my points. I think I did it twice last week. Oh well! Now I answer them out of the little box then paste it in when I am done. So they hopefully come out better. Sorry for the confusion.

    Ekkman

  6. Duane April 12, 2011 at 3:35 am #

    The farmer said he took the pictures from comic books and magazines. He also baked the stones in dung to achieve a patina. He said it was easier than farming. I’m not sure what the issue is, here. We have an admitted hoax. Look at them. If they were found on a farm, they would be very eroded.

  7. Carl M April 12, 2011 at 5:13 am #

    Patena is the oxidized coating that develops on artifacts over a long period of time. Scientists study this to determine things like the authenticity of age or antiquity.

    Patina is the key to a good fake which is why there a so many ways to achieve the effect, some which are impossible to detect without advanced analysis such as isotope analysis.

    Using a portable proscope, a portable microscope that magnifies images up to 200 times,

    Oh, dear. Visual inspection is easily fooled.

    Dr. Swift was able to confirm the authenticity of these stones,

    Is that Dr Dennis Swift, Doctor of theology?

    observing the patena layer both on the black of the stones as well as on the white lines that form the drawings.

    Fake patina would have the same appearance.

    This was an important find because modern skeptics of these stones claim that they were carved recently by a farmer who has admitted in a police report to making the stones to sell them.

    A farmer admitted to doing some carvings. Nobody is suggesting he worked alone.

    The problem with this skepticism is that they have found over 11,000 of these stones, that’s a lot of work for a man running a farm, not to mention the carvings that are on these stones depict information that the farmer would have had no idea about. These burial stones depict brain surgery, c-sections, using magnification and telescopes, maps of coastal seas, and animals that are both alive today and many that seem to be extinct.

    Let’s think, where would simple farming folk find out about the wider world? Maybe books, television, magazines

    .

  8. Mr T April 12, 2011 at 5:38 am #

    What an interesting tour.

    Obviously the interest is in dinosaurs, but are there any pictures of brain & heart surgery on the Ica stones and other advanced knowledge (eg. telescopes).

    The official digs in the 60s came up with Ica stones picturing a Brontasaurus on it with the correct head/skull. Scientists only realised in the late 70s of their mistake.

    Inca culture also has styalised dino’s on the burial clothes, a Nazca line dino, Inca postman artifacts (eg water bottle) with dinos on them.

    Aren’t the pieces “supposedly” priceless as there is a Peruvian law forbidding their sale?

  9. Chase Braud April 12, 2011 at 4:05 pm #

    Someone is in denial. (= Three guesses to tell me who it is!
    Sheesh dude, you really think YOU can them what THEY said and what they meant by it? Calm down, if you don’t believe what the stones predict then move on to another subject, no point arguing a case when you have already decided to remain dogmatic about your answer.

  10. Jack Napper April 13, 2011 at 2:33 am #

    These stones are pre-Incan artifacts made by the Ica people who lived in this area from around 300 BC to 800 AD.

    Are they Inca or pre-Inca? Try to keep it straight.

    We did some investigation of these stones to determine if there was a patena layer around them.

    Wait you did some INVESTIGATING and determined there was something everyone already knew was there? Oh and it’s spelled PATINA.

    Using a portable proscope, a portable microscope that magnifies images up to 200 times…

    A ProScope? It’s a brand of USB microscope not a type Eric. Pretty easily duped I see.

    Dr. Swift was able to confirm the authenticity of these stones, observing the patena layer both on the black of the stones as well as on the white lines that form the drawings.

    The IBBS had this to say about Dr. Swift:

    Dr. Swift’s doctorate is in Systematic Theology, not anthropology, nor geology. We need qualified experts in their field to examine the rocks, not a pastor with a degree in theology to pronounce them authentic.

    This was an important find because modern skeptics of these stones claim that they were carved recently by a farmer who has admitted in a police report to making the stones to sell them

    That would be Basilio Uschuya.

    The problem with this skepticism is that they have found over 11,000 of these stones, that’s a lot of work for a man running a farm, not to mention the carvings that are on these stones depict information that the farmer would have had no idea about. These burial stones depict brain surgery, c-sections, using magnification and telescopes, maps of coastal seas, and animals that are both alive today and many that seem to be extinct.

    He also flipped flopped his story several times in interviews and admitted that he didn’t make them all himself. The images are from comic books, text books and magazines. That’s right Eric I know many Christians like to think of the brown people as ignorant and barely civilized living in mud huts and who have only recently discovered fire but the reality is much different.

  11. Stephen Holshouser April 13, 2011 at 10:37 am #

    Jack Napper said; “Are they Inca or pre-Inca? Try to keep it straight.”

    Facepalm

    What is he supposed to keep straight? That ICA is a city in Peru, or that the INCAS were a group of people that lived in Peru many years after the ICA stones were made?

  12. Pablo Cruz April 13, 2011 at 4:23 pm #

    An interesting point to make out is this:

    If we want to go the route of forgery, we would need to investigate the motive for such forgery.

    Was the forger a christian wanting to prove that man and dinosaur coexisted?

    Or..

    Was the forger a man (christian/non-christian) whose motive was to make money??

    Creationists understands that science comfirms the bible to be scientifically accurate. There is no need to forge. However, I do concede that there can be a creationist who would not take the time to study or investigate a certain claim and promotes it as proof.

    However, there have been many well documented attempts of secular scientists who blatantly lied, hoaxed, and/or forged in order to advance their unscientific belief of evolution and millions/billions of years (Ernst Haeckel, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, etc…)

    We ALL need to look at any claim objectively, with no preconcieved biased ideas. Otherwise, it would be a hinderance to true science.

  13. Peter Bilmer April 13, 2011 at 4:50 pm #

    Thank you for that article Eric!

    That’s really interesting!

    Could you visit the Nazca Lines?

    Regards,
    God bless you!

  14. Peter Bilmer April 13, 2011 at 5:18 pm #

    To correct some of the ( many ) errors, contradictions and false inferences some commentators made:

    “These stones are pre-Incan artifacts made by the Ica people who lived in this area from around 300 BC to 800 AD.”

    Eric was reffering to a people living in a reagion called “Ica” they are additionally known as “Nazca culture”.
    The “Inca culture” are very different people.

    What we really need are scientific, exact and precise scholars, which examine the facts.
    There are enough people with no knowledge and no interest in truth just scoffing and trying to protect their anti-Biblical world view.

    Thank you for your work Eric!
    God bless!

  15. Corey April 14, 2011 at 8:12 am #

    @Danny,
    On your question of Ph.D, it depends on what the Ph .D. is For instance, a person with a doctor in theology does not make him/her an expert on evolution and someone with a doctor in biology does not make an expert of theology. You would not want an electrician doing your plumbing and vice versa.

    Also, I would like to know if the Ph. D. was legit. Many of us have Kent Hovind’s and I asked him on his blog about his dissertation. He gave his standard “non-accredited” argument and avoided my questions.

  16. Geno Castagnoli April 14, 2011 at 12:49 pm #

    Pablo wrote:
    Creationists understands that science comfirms the bible to be scientifically accurate. There is no need to forge. However, I do concede that there can be a creationist who would not take the time to study or investigate a certain claim and promotes it as proof.

    However, there have been many well documented attempts of secular scientists who blatantly lied, hoaxed, and/or forged in order to advance their unscientific belief of evolution and millions/billions of years (Ernst Haeckel, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, etc…)

    ######
    Geno points out:
    1) When a creationist gets caught who “blatantly lied, hoaxed, and/or forged to advance their unscientific belief,” other creationists will gather around and treat them with “charity” and decline to pass “judgement” on their fraudulant acts.
    2) When a mainstream scientist gets caught doing the same things, the scientific community will instantly reject the claim(s) and the scientist will lose all credibility in the scientific community. In essence, he will be shunned and his scientific career is over.
    3) Each of the items you listed was “exposed” by mainstream scientists, not creationists.

  17. Pablo Cruz April 14, 2011 at 4:26 pm #

    Ok, let’s keep this relevent. I keep hearing people downplaying Dr. Swift’s opinions based on his observation. Alluding that he is not qualified and that his statements would be invalid.

    If that’s the case, then why side with Darwin or Lyell? Neither were scientists! Darwin’s degree was in Divinity, and Lyell was a lawyer!!

    Why the hypocrisy?

  18. Danny April 14, 2011 at 9:27 pm #

    Corey
    April 14th at 8:12 am
    @Danny,
    On your question of Ph.D, it depends on what the Ph .D. is For instance, a person with a doctor in theology does not make him/her an expert on evolution and someone with a doctor in biology does not make an expert of theology. You would not want an electrician doing your plumbing and vice versa.
    Also, I would like to know if the Ph. D. was legit. Many of us have Kent Hovind’s and I asked him on his blog about his dissertation. He gave his standard “non-accredited” argument and avoided my questions.

    Based on what you said above. I have these few comments to answer you, MY post you answered said this within it, “Speaking of that, Who would you say knows the most, a Ph.D creationist or a Ph.D evolutionist?”
    I would think that my question was clear enough. If I just mentioned a Ph.D evolutionist, would you just automatically think he was a scientist? Just wondering.
    There are scientists in both of the above religious worldviews. Scientists take things for granted just as anyone else. They have their biases too. In context, you should have seen very clearly that I was speaking of scientists based on what you read that I said. I didn’t even hint at those with degrees in areas of electricity or plumbing. That statement by you was way out there based on my words to you in the first place. Speaking of theology, that is the only degree that Darwin had. So surely you would not trust him in the scientific field, would you? I am asking that based on your comment above. There are hundreds coming out from under Darwinism who have Ph.D’s like the other evolutionists that they were at one time. A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
    There are educated guesses that over 10,000 scientists do not believe in macro evolution.
    Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution
    Do any scientists with Ph.D. degrees reject the theory of evolution? Yes, they do!

    So please answer my question this time so I can answer it too after I get your answer. Or was the above your answer? If they both had legit degrees in the correct area such as biology then you would trust both of them? Even if they totally contradicted each other? Correct assumption or not? You let me know by the above statements of yours that it was based on having the correct degree in the correct field. I await your reply.

    Ekkman

  19. Jack Napper April 14, 2011 at 11:52 pm #

    What is he supposed to keep straight? That ICA is a city in Peru, or that the INCAS were a group of people that lived in Peru many years after the ICA stones were made?

    Yeah that was my bad. Gues that’s what I get for skimming the blogs at 2:33am

    However, there have been many well documented attempts of secular scientists who blatantly lied, hoaxed, and/or forged in order to advance their unscientific belief of evolution and millions/billions of years (Ernst Haeckel, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, etc…)

    Thanks Pablo I was wondering when someone was going to go back to the well for this one. Perhaps you could tell us who the scientist were that put forth Piltdown Man? Perhaps you could tell us how it was accepted by every major scientific institution all over the world?

    Wait you can’t??? And why might that be? Maybe you could tell us what scientific journal published the story on Nebraska Man. Can you name the scientist who produced the drawing of this creature? No again???

    I think you’ve been reading Scientology: A History of Man and thought maybe it was a scientific journal or something.

  20. Geno Castagnoli April 15, 2011 at 11:09 am #

    Danny claimed:
    There are educated guesses that over 10,000 scientists do not believe in macro evolution.

    ######
    Geno points out:
    That would be 10,000 out of how many?

    The Discovery Institute has their “Dissent from Darwin” statement that, as far as I can tell has something like 817 signatures.

    On the other hand, NCSE has an opposing “Project Steve” statement in support of evolution with 1158 signatures. Since one must be named “Steve” (or name based on “Steve” such as Stephen, Stephanie, etc.) to sign the poll and only about 1% of the population has such a name, that would represent 115,800 scientists.

    Let’s see…. 817/115800 is about 0.7%. That would leave about 99.3% of scientists supporting evolution. It’s probably safe to say that isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of creationism/design by the scientific community.

  21. Jack Napper April 15, 2011 at 11:30 am #

    Based on what you said above. I have these few comments to answer you, MY post you answered said this within it, “Speaking of that, Who would you say knows the most, a Ph.D creationist or a Ph.D evolutionist?”

    Interesting the comment presented to you was in regards to the field in which they hold a PhD. It was not their beliefs beyond that. The answer to your question is that no I, or anyone else with a brain, wouldn’t simply trust someone with a PhD who also happened to be an “evolutionist”.

    I would think that my question was clear enough. If I just mentioned a Ph.D evolutionist, would you just automatically think he was a scientist? Just wondering.

    No, just as I don’t trust people like Kent Hovind and Carl Baugh when they claim to have scientific backgrounds.

    There are scientists in both of the above religious worldviews. Scientists take things for granted just as anyone else. They have their biases too.

    Yes, but scientists follow the scientific method and publish their findings in peer reviewed journals. Others can repeat experiments or visit dig sites for example. If the evidence shows their bias to be wrong it’s a wonderful thing. I don’t see your point beyond try to argue “it’s perfectly rational to believe that magic sky pixies did this despite there being no evidence to support it”. Of course who is more dishonest? The secular scientist who publishes in peer-reviewed scientific journals, give quotes for articles written by the popular press and even issues statements of correction when misquoted OR the Creationist scientist who posts their findings on blogs, runs screaming to the popular press (which they and their ilk try to pass off as scientific journals/papers) or even create dazzled up websites with only a few non-peer-reviewed papers and labels them scientific journals with no real purpose other than to serve as garbage fodder for Creationists websites to poke fun at (Journal of Cosmology)?

    Speaking of theology, that is the only degree that Darwin had. So surely you would not trust him in the scientific field, would you?

    BIOGRAPHY FAIL.

    There are hundreds coming out from under Darwinism who have Ph.D’s like the other evolutionists that they were at one time. A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism

    According to the most recent count there are far less than 800 names on this list and less than 1% hold degrees in relevant fields. Many who signed the document who have gone on record that they do not reject Evolutionary Theory but the theory as presented by the document ambiguously labeled as “Darwinism”.

    There are educated guesses that over 10,000 scientists do not believe in macro evolution.

    Thank you for the laugh. Perhaps you could tell us who is making these “educated guesses” and by what factors do they based these guesses? As of 1999 there were estimated to be 955,300 biological scientists in the US alone by the NSF. Even if your guesstimation were accurate 99.9% of scientists accept evolutionary theory. One more thing. Do I really need to bring up PROJECT STEVE?

    Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution
    Do any scientists with Ph.D. degrees reject the theory of evolution? Yes, they do!

    No one is doubting that. However, most make arguments beyond their field of study. Many who are biologists have been found to either be pushing their own or group propaganda (using their degrees as arguments from authority) and others have been presented with their own papers in support of evolutionary theory.

    If they both had legit degrees in the correct area such as biology then you would trust both of them? Even if they totally contradicted each other? Correct assumption or not? You let me know by the above statements of yours that it was based on having the correct degree in the correct field. I await your reply.

    Is your question would I simply trust them blindly simply because both had degrees in biological sciences? ARGUMENTS FROM AUTHORITY.

    Would I accept or reject their claims based on their worldviews? No. Though past experience tells me I should be prepared to laugh at the Creationist when they do things like making ARGUMENTS FROM PERSONAL INCREDULITY (Michael Behe). I would be skeptical of anything Behe had to present even though he is a legitimate biochemist. However, I would also be skeptical of anything presented by say Kenneth Miller or Richard Dawkins.

  22. Pablo Cruz April 15, 2011 at 11:44 am #

    Jack, the piltdown man hoax hit me hard because a catholic priest was involved. I grew up catholic, but now I don’t claim denomination. You really think I can’t produce the information? Just Google it. There are pages of resources. I’m at work at this time. Later tonight I’ll be more specific for you. Just to get you started, look up Ernst Haeckel (not sure of spelling, I’ll look it up later, can’t now). His case occurred back in 1875!!

    Nebraska man was built from a tooth of a certain pig!

    I’m going to give you an opportunity to find this yourself. Because when I do, and give you references, your statement about me being in a well will be foolish.

  23. Jennifer Preston April 15, 2011 at 11:45 am #

    Pablo Cruz wrote:

    “If that’s the case, then why side with Darwin or Lyell? Neither were scientists! Darwin’s degree was in Divinity, and Lyell was a lawyer!!

    Why the hypocrisy?”

    Because back in their day there wasn’t the expansion of higher education. Even back in Einsteins time very few people had degrees. Einstein didn’t have a relevant degree but he did have a LOT of very advanced mathematical training.

    Take anyone after, say, 1960, and show me a published peer reviewed science paper that was written by someone who didn’t have a RELEVANT PhD.

  24. Pablo Cruz April 15, 2011 at 2:46 pm #

    As stated before, I’m at work. I’m a merchant mariner and I work on a boat. We are heading out as I write this. Fortunately, we are heading to another port where I have signal. I hope I can get the info for Jack later tonite. If not, Jack, you can look me up on Facebook Facebook.com/pablocruzjr. I think I’m the only one with that name from Crestview, Fl.

    So if I’m not able to get the info for you in time, you know where to find me and it also give you more time to look up the info for yourself.

  25. Pablo Cruz April 15, 2011 at 3:27 pm #

    We needed fuel for the boat and so I had time to look up Ernst Haeckel since he is the first I’ve mentioned. Found the info in Wikipedia under embryology under his name. Haeckel is quoted as being foolish. Check it out, Jack.

    The other I’ll wait. And give you a chance to find the info. My goal is not to prove you wrong, but for you to realize the info is well documented.

  26. Pablo Cruz April 16, 2011 at 12:20 pm #

    Piltdown man was a lot easier than I thought. I went to a secular website http://www.talkorigins.org and looked up piltdown man. Being a secular pro evolution website, the tone is respectful. Piltdown man was a hoax and is very well documented. There is no hiding from this one.

    Jack, I have proven my point.

    You said I couldn’t find this information. Well, Jack, I can and I did!!

    Again I say, I’m not trying to prove you wrong. Maybe you were simply unaware of this. Hoaxes and lies and forgeries in an attempt to legitimize evolution as truth is well documented.

    So, about this farmer in Peru, is he a creationist trying to prove man and dinosaur coexisted, or is he a farmer, Christian or non Christian, simply looking to make a profit?

  27. Corey April 17, 2011 at 7:53 pm #

    @Danny

    First, evolution is not a religion because evolution does not assure salvation, there is no belief in a precise theology and it does not convert nonbelievers. As I stated in an earlier post, evolution is a scientific theory and creationism is, at best, a tenet of a religion, not a religion itself.

    Second, your question about type of Ph. D. is flawed as there are many different types of Ph. Ds and most of them are irrelevant to evolution, such as theology, engineering, etc. as opposed to biology. This is why those who disagree with you suggest that Kent and Eric do not have even a basic understanding of evolution (see their arugments of their six definitions of evolution).

    I may not have a degree in any scientific field, but I have advanced understanding of evolution. However, I am no expert in theology compared to you, but I do have knowledge with computers, the internet and graphic design. I looked at your web site and it is poorly designed: disorganized, cluttered, lack of a menu, long pages. You may disagree with my assessment but I have designed web sites and that is my area of expertise.

    Your argument of the number of Ph. D. scientists who reject evolution is fallible since most of these are irrelevant to study of evolution, specifically biological (Darwinian) evolution (fewer than 20% are biologists). Some of those on the list are not active scientists, have not worked as scientists and doubt evolution due to religious beliefs, not due to scientific findings. Are you aware of Project Steve, which lists the number of scientists named Steve who accept evolution as fact?

    Finally, Charles Darwin did not have a degree in theology. He did study natural theology, but also studied medicine and geology. His job was a naturalist and so his studies make him an expert in the field of biology and evolution. He made observations and did research unlike creationists, even with a Ph. D. in biology, who are more interested in preaching.

    There is more to being a scientist or an expert than claiming you have a Ph. D.

  28. Tiffany Zwieg April 17, 2011 at 9:00 pm #

    Eric,

    Our family is SO excited for you on this trip! What a great experience! We love the study of ancient history and have found some really amazing things to date. An interesting theory about that Candelabra is that is could very well be related to the Hebrew Menorah. Just send an email if you want the “full theory.”

    The stones are an amazing find too! Love what Jonathan Gray has to say about them in some of his books.

    It is so exciting to see all of the negative responses you are getting, it must mean you are doing something right! :)