Page 143 - The Miracle in the Ant

characteristics of the creature concerned.
The distinctive details are present in
the soft tissues that quickly vanish
with time. With the soft tissues
speculatively interpreted, every-
thing becomes possible within the
boundaries of the imagination of
the reconstruction's producer.
Earnst A. Hooten from Harvard
University explains the situa-
tion like this:

To attempt to restore the
soft parts is an even more False fossil:
Piltdown Man
hazardous undertaking. The
lips, the eyes, the ears, and the
nasal tip leave no clues on the under-
lying bony parts. You can with equal facility model on a Neanderthaloid
skull the features of a chimpanzee or the lineaments of a philosopher.
These alleged restorations of ancient types of man have very little if any
scientific value and are likely only to mislead the public… So put not
your trust in reconstructions. 95

Studies Made to Fabricate False Fossils
Unable to find valid evidence in the fossil record for the theory of
evolution, some evolutionists have ventured to manufacture their own.
These efforts, which have even been included in encyclopaedias under
the heading "evolution forgeries", are the most telling indication that the
theory of evolution is an ideology and a philosophy that evolutionists
are hard put to defend. Two of the most egregious and notorious of
these forgeries are described below.

Piltdown Man
Charles Dawson, a well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropol-
ogist, came forth with a claim that he had found a jawbone and a cra-
nial fragment in a pit in the area of Piltdown, England, in 1912. Although

Harun Yahya 143