“A clear line of fossils”? Fradulent statements like this, ubiquitous in evolution-based college textbooks (e.g., Figs. 1-7), will be the downfall of science if the community does not distance itself from the blatant use of fraud to manipulate people’s beliefs. Anthropology, biology, and paleontology have become a conglomerate easily provable to employ fraud in the captive-audience science classroom. Except that they’re being paid, I would not want to be the AAAS or an attorney representing mainstream science at this point.

When I was a boy in 1960s Michigan there were several things I wanted to be when I grew up. They included, paleontologist (see Tales of a Fossil Collector in this issue); marine biologist; astronaut; artist/musician; and detective or attorney.

As far as the desire to be an attorney goes, it was inspired by the television program, Perry Mason—excellent television giving a sense of critical thinking until the show ended in 1966. But right on the heels of Perry Mason (and no less, the thought-provoking series, The Outer Limits), just a few months later began the baby-boomer life-changing phenomenon of Star Trek.

One typically hears how Star Trek influenced modern technology. That’s obvious. However, I would like to say that one of Star Trek’s biggest influences on me as a 12-year old was Science Officer Spock’s constant referral to logical thinking. Of course, I also admired Captain Kirk et al.

This whole notion of logical or critical thinking led me to the school library and a book on logic. That is when (unrelated to any classes) I first learned about logical fallacies, over-generalization, circular reasoning, black & white thinking, etc., all of which are generally considered bad science. It was many years later I discovered that these are traits of evolutionary fanaticism. The logic book also brought me to Plato and eventually reading many of his dialogues, learning perspective, Theory of Forms, and a general sense of putting actual effort into thinking.

Fig. 1. Biology, 10th Ed., Raven et al, 2013. Like all similar textbooks this series is packed with fraudulent statements presented as fact.

So, that is where my idealized expectations of science came from. However, as most readers already know, after experiencing censorship of empirical evidence starting with a paper called The Impact of Fossils on the Development of Visual Representation (again, see Tales of a Fossil Collector), and later, The Graphics of Bilzingsleben, awareness of publication control by evolution fanatics began to emerge; and trust in peer review as ‘science’ appropriately dissolved to nothing. Regarding the censorship of Fossils, archaeologist Paul Bahn wrote me that Current Anthropology published “a lot of rubbish” while blocking good papers. Anthropologist Randy White expressed identical sentiment regarding the censorship as did many other leading authorities. Censorship makes deception possible by removing the means to assess evidence objectively. False statements then become unrecognizable even to textbook writers; and very few will even bother investigating evidence for themselves. This is how textbooks enable fanatics to control the public mind. They are going to need dozens of attorneys defending them once the scope of this deception cracks open.

Fig. 2. The Earth Through Time, 7th Ed. (2003) is “historical” geology, i.e. not objective geology but that absorbed by evolutionism. Every edition is packed with false statements or speculations rendered as fact. Like Historical Geology, this book is beautifully produced. It is only its evolutionism that makes it a work of propaganda.

Continuing from Part 2...

18.) “Most fossil intermediates in vertebrate evolution have indeed been found.”

-Biology, 6th Ed. Raven et al. 2002: 455.

This is an outright fraudulent statement that is not even close to being true as the following quotes will attest. The same is the case for invertebrates with literally zillions upon zillions upon zillions of fossils (you have to

get out into the field to know this) none of which show any “clear line.” In other words, the statement proves that the authors of a leading biology textbook either have no idea what they’re talking about when it comes to the fossil record or are participants in fraud. Still, it is presented to trusting students as fact. One way deceptions like this thrive is that each field in the template-thinking conglomerate—biology-paleontology-anthropology—keeps duping the other while individuals in each group have no grasp of the issues from outside the conglomerate. Put the experts on the stand and they won’t repeat this statement without qualification, as only an easily-duped judge such as Judge Jones could buy it (I have read the Kitzmiller v. Dover transcript—it is packed with trickery). No one who knows fossils, strata, or capabilities of time would support the statement on the stand. If they did it would enable a single on-the-ball opposing attorney to crack wide open the entire mindset in one fell swoop.

Fig. 3. The Earth Through Time, 10th Ed. (2013). Being “historical geology” (i.e. Darwinism rather than objective geology), every edition, like all textbooks in the genre, is filled to the brim with fictions taught as fact.

19.) “The fossil record provides a clear record of the major evolutionary transitions that have occurred through time.”

-Biology, 6th Ed. Raven et al. 2002: 441

Fig. 4. Evolutionary Analysis, upcoming 5th Edition, Freeman et al, 2013. Don’t expect any surprises. Prediction: the reader should find as much fiction fanatically stated as fact as in prior editions using rhetorical intimidation a.k.a. Richard Dawkins style.

20.) “A clear line of fossils now traces the transition between whales and hoofed mammals… reptiles and mammals… dinosaurs and birds… apes and humans.”

–Biology, 6th Edition, Raven et al, 2002: 455.

Despite the boldness with which the Biology textbook makes the above false statement it regularly contradicts itself as do all such textbooks. To assess the value of the statement consider the following concessions from another textbook. It should be obvious that there is general knowledge in biology, paleontology, and anthropology that they are making false claims. Admission that what they are saying is not true is at the heart of textbook deception:

21.) “Although some may find it frustrating, human evolution is just like that of other groups in that we have followed an uncertain evolutionary path.”

-Historical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 398.

Frustrating is clearly not the right word. Historical Geology presents evolution as a fact; yet in moments of lucidity, like this one, they come right out and admit that there is nothing clear about the claims at all. They emphasize this point a few pages further in:

22.) “There is no clear consensus on the evolutionary history of the hominid lineage.”

-Historical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 402.

Fig. 5. Life: The Science of Biology (Vol. II). Every edition loaded with false statements of fact.

23.) “Humans arose from australopithecine ancestors. Many experts believe that the recently discovered Australopithecus garhi or a similar species gave rise to the genus Homo.”

-Life: The Science of Biology, 6th Ed. (Vol. II: Evolution, Diversity, and Ecology; Purves et al., 2001): 597.

Evolutionary doublespeak. Here the fiction is first presented as fact followed by a direct admission it is “belief.” Students find no discrepancy between a statement of fact and the same statement reiterated as a belief.

24.) “One can draw the hominid family tree in two very different ways, either lumping variants together or splitting them into separate species.”

-Biology, 6th Ed. Raven et al. 2002: 477.

A few pages earlier the authors state as fact that there is a “clear line of fossils” between apes and humans (p. 455). If there is a clear line of fossils then why all the interpretation? Here the authors admit that they don’t even know if various hominid fossils are different species. This isn’t exactly unimportant when it comes to the idea of evolution. The quandary applies to all fossils.

25.) “The fossil database for hominids is frustratingly sparse.”

26.) “Paleoanthropologists …make educated guesses about which fossil species represent ancestors that live at the branch points of the cladogram…”

-Evolutionary Analysis, Freeman and Herron, 1998: 538, 541-2.

-Historyical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 398

-Life: The Science of Biology, 6th Ed. (Vol. II: Evolution, Diversity, and Ecology; Purves et al., 2001): 595.

As above, this is typical evolutionary doublespeak; the first sentence is stated as fact while the following sentence (in the referred figure) shows it was a false statement.

28.) “Any single evolutionary scheme of hominid evolution presented here would be premature.”

-Historical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 404.

So the authors say, and in this form, it almost sounds scientific. However, a few pages further the textbook proceeds to tell students exactly how humans evolved as if it had never said otherwise:

29.) “The oldest known hominid is Sahelanthropus. ...It was followed by Orrorin...then...Ardipithecus. … Recent discoveries indicate Ardipithecus evolved into Australopithecus. ...The human lineage began...with the evolution of Homo habilis. ...Homo erectus evolved from Homo habilis. ...Homo sapiens evolved from H. erectus.”

-Historical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 410.

The human evolution mythology presented as a fact. The authors even misuse a trusted scientific word, “indicate.” “Indicate” expresses a certainty. There is no more certainty that Ardipithecus evolved into Australopithecus than that bonobos evolved into Australopithecus.

30.) “The footprints [the 3.6 million-year old Laetoli, Tanzania, human footprints] confirm skeletal evidence that the species [Australopithecus afarensis] had a fully erect posture.”

-The Earth Through Time, 7th Ed., HL Levin, 2003: 552.

31.) “These fossil footprints... are not human. … They record… Australopithecus, the group from which our genus, Homo, evolved. …Human evolution is the part of the evolution story … which we know the most.”

-Biology, 6th Ed. Raven et al. 2002: 477.

This ongoing myth of australopithecine posture being confirmed by the Laetoli footprints is false. There is no association between the two. The myth was started by Donald Johanson (discoverer of Lucy) who commandeered the footprints from their discoverer, Mary Leakey. Leakey was about to introduce them as the oldest “human” footprints (D. Ellis, The Leakey Family: Leaders in the Search for Human Origins, 1978: 100). Leakey should not have accepted Johanson’s takeover of the Laetoli footprints. Instead, she simply responded with her deep regret that “the Laetoli fellow is now doomed to be called Australopithecus afarensis.”

32.) “Make no mistake about it. They are like modern human footprints.”

–Tim White, excavator of the Laetoli footprints; Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind, by Donald Johanson.

33.) “Because of the recent controversy concerning the teaching of evolution in the public schools... how would you go about convincing the school board that humans have indeed evolved from earlier hominids?”

-Historical Geology, 5th Ed, Wicander et al., 2007: 404.

This is clearly not a normal science question. Modern academia tries to convince students of evolution any way it can. In this particular instance the captive audience science classroom is used to ask a “leading question” of students on an obviously debatable subject. It shows the type of thinking skills students are given as they go through academic training and are sent out into the world. It is not a question for critical thinking. It is one for simple memorization as noted in the Prologue quotes of Part 1. It also shows part of how higher institutional education produces graduates without scientific objectivity but with an agenda attached (See Part 2).

If human evolution is the part of the evolution story the authors of Biology claim we “know the most” then the few quotes provided in this installment should show that the whole paradigm is in trouble. It is no wonder that students who graduate with degrees in the evolution conglomerate come out reliant on techniques of propaganda (Part 1) as a defense for their training. As shown, neither students nor textbook writers are able to distinguish facts from fiction when it comes to evolution. Students are trained not to look into the evidence—or lack—for themselves. For them, the only option is to believe that somewhere out there paleontologists have all this overwhelming fossil evidence they keep hearing about. So, in the final turn, what we are actually talking about is faith. Faith is a part of all science and is fine except when promoting a myth of origins as fact while withholding relevant evidence that does not support the myth. That circumstance is not science.

John Feliks has specialized in the study of early human cognition for nearly twenty years demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that human cognition does not evolve. His work and empirical geometric evidence have been censored by the evolution community. Earlier, his focus was on the fossil record studying fossils in the field across the U.S. and parts of Canada as well as studying many of the classic texts Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Index Fossils of North America, etc.). He wrote the article, Ardi: How to Create a Science Myth, and claims that all pre-human hominids or similar claims for transitional invertebrate fossils are equally as easy to debunk because when the paradigm is flawed it is not difficult to debunk everything it contains. Feliks encourages students going through standard science training to openly question the ideology being forced upon them as fact in the captive audience science classroom with full confidence that evidence is there to support them.