Page 688 - Atlas of Creation Volume 2

pretation of the soft tissues, the reconstructed drawings or models become totally dependent on the imagina-

tion of the person producing them. Earnst A. Hooten from Harvard University explains the situation like this:

To attempt to restore the soft parts is an even more hazardous undertaking. The lips, the eyes, the ears, and the nasal
tip leave no clues on the underlying bony parts. You can with equal facility model on a Neanderthaloid skull the fea-
tures 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. 195

As a matter of fact, evolutionists invent such preposterous stories that they even ascribe different faces to
the same skull. For example, the three different reconstructed drawings made for the fossil named
Australopithecus robustus (Zinjanthropus) are a famous example of such forgery.

The biased interpretation of fossils and outright fabrication of many imaginary reconstructions are an indi-
cation of how frequently evolutionists have recourse to tricks. Yet these seem innocent when compared to the
deliberate forgeries that have been perpetrated in the history of evolution.
There is no concrete fossil evidence to support the "ape-man" image, which is unceasingly promulgated by
the media and evolutionist academic circles. With brushes in their hands, evolutionists produce imaginary
creatures; nevertheless, the fact that these drawings correspond to no matching fossils constitutes a serious

problem for them. One of the interesting methods they employ to overcome this problem is to "produce" the
fossils they cannot find. Piltdown man, which may be the biggest scandal in the history of science, is a typical
example of this method.

The Piltdown Man Scandal

In 1912, a well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropologist named Charles Dawson came out with the
assertion that he had found a jawbone and a cranial fragment in a pit in Piltdown, England. Even though the

jawbone was more ape-like, the teeth and the skull were like a man's. These specimens were labelled the
"Piltdown man." Alleged to be 500,000 years old, they were displayed as an absolute proof of human evolution
in several museums. For more than 40 years, many scientific articles were written on "Piltdown man," many in-
terpretations and drawings were made, and the fossil was presented as important evidence for human evolu-
tion. No fewer than 500 doctoral theses were written on the subject. 196 While visiting the British Museum in
1921, leading American paleontologist Henry Fairfield Osborn said "We have to be reminded over and over

again that Nature is full of paradoxes" and proclaimed Piltdown "a discovery of transcendant importance to
the prehistory of man." 197
In 1949, Kenneth Oakley, from the British Museum's Paleontology Department, attempted to use "fluorine
testing," a new test used for determining the date of fossils. A trial was made on the fossil of Piltdown man. The
result was astonishing. During the test, it was realized that the jawbone of Piltdown man did not contain any

fluorine. This indicated that it had remained buried no more than a few years. The skull, which contained only
a small amount of fluorine, showed that it was only a few thousand years old.
It was determined that the teeth in the jawbone, belonging to an orangutan, had been worn down artifi-
cially and that the "primitive" tools discovered with the fossils were simple imitations that had been sharpened
with steel implements. In the detailed analysis completed by Joseph Weiner, this forgery was revealed to the
public in 1953. The skull belonged to a 500-year-old man, and the jaw bone belonged to a recently deceased

ape! The teeth had been specially arranged in a particular way and added to the jaw, and the molar surfaces
were filed in order to resemble those of a man. Then all these pieces were stained with potassium dichromate
to give them an old appearance. These stains began to disappear when dipped in acid. Sir Wilfred Le Gros
Clark, who was in the team that uncovered the forgery, could not hide his astonishment at this situation, and
said: "The evidences of artificial abrasion immediately sprang to the eye. Indeed so obvious did they seem it

may well be asked—how was it that they had escaped notice before?" 198 In the wake of all this, "Piltdown man"
was hurriedly removed from the British Museum where it had been displayed for more than 40 years.

The Nebraska Man Scandal

In 1922, Henry Fairfield Osborn, the director of the American Museum of Natural History, declared that he

686 Atlas of Creation Vol. 2