Homo Erectus Remains have been found in the same strata and in close proximity to ordinary Homo sapiens, suggesting that they lived together.
Dr. Henry Fairfeild Osborn Natural History magazine, January/February 1926. In the article Osborn says that a hypothetical unbiased zoologist from Mars would classify people into several distinct genera and many species. Thus, said Osborn, Negroes would be classified as a separate species, not yet evolved to full human stature. “The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro,” wrote Osborn as a so-called fact of evolution, “is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens [which, for Osborn, meant Caucasians only].” Osborn was a leading evolutionist of the 1920’s, and it is easy to see how his kind of evolutionary thinking (rejected by modern evolutionists) helped to pave the way for Hitler’s Nazi racism in the ’30’s and ’40’s.
RECONSTRUCTIONS: W. HOWELLS, Harvard "A great legend has grown up to plague both paleontologists and anthropologists. It is that one of; men can take a tooth or a small and broken piece of bone, gaze at it, and pass his hand over his forehead once or twice, and then take a sheet of paper and draw a picture of what the whole animal looked like as it tramped the Terriary terrain. If this were quite true, the anthropologists would make the F.B.I. look like a troop of Boy Scouts.“ MANKIND SO FAR, p. l38
Roger Lewin on Piltdown Man “Given all the many anatomical incongruities in the Piltdown remains, which of course are glaringly obvious from the vantage of the present, it is truly astonishing that the forgery was so eagerly embraced”. Thus “the real interest in Piltown is how those who believed in the fossil saw in it what they wanted to see.”
Jane Maienschein on Piltdown Man Piltdown shows us “how easily susceptible researchers can be manipulated into believing that they have actually found just what they had been looking for.”
Orce Man Orce Man, as the find came to be known, was said to represent the oldest human fossil ever discovered in Europe. Problem is that two French scientists had suggested the fragment "may have come" from a donkey. Turns out that the bone is genuinely difficult to identify, as proved by the fact that debate over its status has continued for over 10 years. I don’t know what you are thinking but there is hardly a convincing missing link to be found here.
“Bones of Contention” Many human like fossils have been found since the 1912 Piltdown Man that, unlike Piltdown, appear to be genuine. Some appear to be distinctly ape while others are human like. However, even genuine fossils have been so controversial that in 1970 British anthropologist John Napier called them “bones of contention”. And each new discovery seems to add to the problem rather than solve it.
Niles Eldredge and Ian Tattersall It is a “myth that the evolutionary histories of living things are essentially a matter of discovery.” If this were true they wrote “one could confidently expect that as more hominid fossils were found the story of human evolution would become clearer. Whereas if anything, the opposite has occurred.” Eldredge and Tattersall, the Myths of Evolution, pp. 126-127
Even Richard Leakey, the foremost hominid bone hunter of the past 20 years has begun to question what it is all about. "If pressed about man's ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional specie to man, including Lucy, since 1470 was as old and probably older. If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving."
Richard Leakey "By 1989, [Richard] Leakey sought to distance himself from his original theory, insisting any attempts at specific reconstructions of the human lineage were premature."—*R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution (1990), p. 218.
just-so stories, plausible scenarios for which no evidence can be found Stuart Kauffman (A leading thinker on self-organization and the science of complexity as applied to biology), At Home in the Universe, 1995, p. 43. “Evolution is filled with these just-so stories, plausible scenarios for which no evidence can be found, stories we love to tell but on which we should place no intellectual reliance.”
Teaching About Evolution “Early hominids had smaller brains and larger faces than species belonging to the genus Homo, including our species, Homo Sapiens.” Teaching About Evolution, p. 20
School Textbooks Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, Biology – Visualizing Life, 1998, p. 213. “Look closely at your hand. You have five flexible fingers. Animals with five flexible fingers are called primates. Monkeys, apes, and humans are examples of primates….Primates most likely evolved from small, insect-eating rodent-like mammals that lived about 60 million years ago.”
School Textbooks Miller and Levine, Biology, 2000, p. 757. “But all researchers agree on certain basic facts. We know, for example, that humans evolved from ancestors we share with other living primates such as chimpanzees and apes.”
A Falsehood, a Joke in Bad Taste Giuseppe Sermonti, Ph.D. Genetics, Creation ex nihilo, 1993, p. 13. “Many schools proclaim as a matter without any doubt that man has derived from the African apes…. This is a falsehood which any honest scientist should protest against. It is not balanced teaching. That which science has never demonstrated should be erased from any textbook and from our minds and remembered only as a joke in bad taste. One should also teach people how many hoaxes have been plotted to support the theory of the simian (ape) origins of man.”
M.L. Lubenow in “Bones of Contention” “… has been one of the most successful tools ever used to promote human evolution. It constituted powerful visual ‘proof’ for human evolution that even a small child could grasp. It was a masterpiece of Madison Avenue promotion.” Lubenow, M.L., Bones of Contention, Baker Books, Grand Rapids, MI, Updated and revised edition, p. 39, 2004.
William Fix, The Bone Peddlers "The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely known that those who insist on positive declarations can do nothing more than jump from one hazardous surmise to another and hope that the next dramatic discovery does not make them utter fools . . Clearly, some people refuse to learn from this. As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have temerity to tell us that there is ‘no doubt’ how man originated. If only they had the evidence . . "I have gone to some trouble to show that there are formidable objections to all the subhuman and near-human species that have been proposed as ancestors.“ William Fix, The Bone Peddlers (1984), pp. 150-153.