Click to View

Fossil Man
Evolutionist-Converter Quotes from Video Lectures!

Click to View

Fossil Man

Click to View

 

 

Click to View

Professor Knockout Quotes!

Click to View
The only official collection of quotes by Dr. Don Patton on the internet.

An important message from Dr. Patton regarding these quotes:
I use most of these quotes as handouts to provide documentation for my lecture series. They were not intended to stand alone as arguments by themselves. However this web site (www.bible.ca) convinced me that they could be useful as a reference tool, especially for those who attend the lectures, and I agreed. I commented at the time that some of the quotes would not make sense without the lecture. A few (two) have charged that a small number of these quotes misrepresent the intent of the context. When the charges were investigated, it was discovered, sure enough, if they had heard them used in the context of the lecture, they would have seen that the use was appropriate. It should be remembered that we are not quoting these individuals to imply that they are creationists. Rather, just the opposite. We are using them as antagonistic witnesses. When such individuals acknowledge facts contrary to their own interest, the credibility of their testimony increases dramatically. We want you to know that these individuals are devout evolutionists. It should also be remembered that the quotes are used as graphics in a lecture. It is easy to defeat the purpose of effective communication by too much detail in the graphic. A longer excerpt might be desirable but ineffective. This practical challenge is one of the reasons documentation is provided in the form of a handout, which allows one to check the entire book or article referenced. If you feel that any of the quotes are used in a "deceptive and misleading" way, please contact the webmaster a formal inquiry will be made of your concerns. We are not afraid to admit error and make changes.

Dr. Don R. Patton

Click to View

Click to View

On-line Video
(Real Player needed)

Printable Documentation

Click to View

33 minutes

35 minutes

Part 1: Fossil Man

Part 2: Fossil Man

Below is the outline for the video. We recommend you print the outline below before viewing the video. Then watch the video with the hard copy (printed) of the outline in your hand. Enjoy!

 

 

 

Click to View

Fossil Man

 

APES FROM?, Donald Johanson, "At any rate, modern gorillas, orangs and chimpanzees spring out of nowhere, as it were. They are here today; they have no yesterday..." Lucy,p.363

 

Richard Leakey, "Unfortunately, the fossil record is somewhat incomplete as far as the hominids are concerned, and is all but blank for the apes." The Making Of Mankind, 43

 

AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE? "David Pilbeam [Harvard] comments wryly, 'If you brought in a smart scientists from another discipline and showed him the meager evidence we've got he'd surely say, 'Forget it; there isn't enough to go on.'" The Making Of Mankind, p.43

 

FROM APES, Charles Darwin, "But a naturalist undoubtedly would have ranked as an ape or a monkey...however much the conclusion may revolt our pride, that our early progenitors would have been properly designated." The Descent Of Man, p.520.

 

Earnst A. Hooten, Harvard, "If we are descended from apes our remote ancestors ought to look their part. You may not be willing to admit that you resemble an ape;... But if that thousandth ancestor's forebearers become progressively more simian as you trace back the genealogical lines you will have to admit that somewhere in your family tree there squats an ape." Up From The Ape, p.289.

 

George Gaylord Simpson, Harvard "On this subject, by the way, there has been way too much pussyfooting. Apologists emphasize that man cannot be the descendant of any living ape—a statement that is obvious to the verge of imbecility—and go on to state or imply that man is not really descended from an ape or monkey at all, but from an earlier common ancestor. In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man's ancestors were apes or monkeys (or successively both). It is pusillanimous [cowardly—DP] if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise." (emp. in orig.) This View of Life, p. 12

 

Reconstructions Are Unscientific

 

RECONSTRUCTIONS? Earnst A. Hooten, Harvard, "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 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.", Up From The Ape, p.332.

 

W. Howells, Harvard, "A great legend has grown up to plague both paleontologists and anthropologists. It is that one of these wondrous 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 Tertiary 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.138.

 

OBJECTIVE? David Pilbeam, Yale, "I am also aware of the fact that, at least in my own subject of paleoanthropology, 'theory' - heavily influenced by implicit ideas - almost always dominates 'data.' ...Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted." Bones Of Contention, p.127.

 

Lord Z.Zuckerman, "We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time." Beyond The Ivory Tower, p.19

"Family Trees" Are Unscientific

 

BASIS, Roger Lewin, Ed., Research News, Science, "The key issue is the ability correctly to infer a genetic relationship between two species on the basis of a similarity in appearance...can be deceptive, partly because similarity of structure does not necessarily imply an identical genetic heritage: a shark (which is a fish) and a porpoise (which is a mammal) look similar..." Bones Of Contention, 1987, p.123.

 

ANCESTORS? Richard C. Lewontin, Harvard , "Look, I'm a person who says in this book [Human Diversity, 1982] that we don't know anything about the ancestors of the human species. All the fossils which have been dug up and are claimed to be ancestors - we haven't the faintest idea whether they are ancestors. ...All you've got is Homo sapiens there, you've got that fossil there, you've got another fossil there...and it's up to you to draw the lines. Because there are no lines.", Harper's, 2/84.

 

UNRELIABLE J. Lowenstein & Adriene Zihlman, "But anatomy and the fossil record cannot be relied on for defining evolutionary lineages. Yet, paleontologist persist in doing just this. ...the subjective element in this approach to building evolutionary trees, which many paleontologist advocate with almost religious fervor, is demonstrated by the outcome: there is no single family tree on which they agree." Nature, 1992, Vol.355, p.78.

 

LINE UP? Bernard Wood, Prof. Of Human Origins, George Washington U. "There is a popular image of human evolution that you'll find all over the place ...On the left of the picture there's an ape... On the right, a man... Between the two is a succession of figures that become ever more like humans... Our progress from ape to human looks so smooth, so tidy. It's such a beguiling image that even the experts are loath to let it go. But it is an illusion." New Scientist, 10/26/02.

 

MARY LEAKEY'S CONCLUSION, According To Associated Press, "Since scientists can never prove a particular scenario of human evolution," Leakey said "all these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that's a lot of nonsense." 12/9/1996

Australopithecus Is An Ape

 

LEAKEYS DENY, Roger Lewin, Ed., Research News, Science, Richard and his parents, Louis and Mary, have held to a view of human origins for nearly half a century now that the line of true man, the line of Homo - large brain, toolmaking and so on - has a separate ancestry that goes back millions and millions of years. And the ape-man, Australopithecus, has nothing to do with human ancestry." Bones Of Contention, 1987, p.18.

 

DEFECTION, "Dr. Leakey bases his repudiation of Darwin on the results of his long search in East Africa for the remains of the original man. The generally accepted post-Darwin view is that man developed from the baboon 3 to 5 million years ago. But Leakey has found no evidence of a spurt in development at that time." Chicago American, 1/25, 1967

 

DISMISSED APE, Lord Solly Zuckerman, "His Lordship's scorn for the level of competence he sees displayed by paleoanthropologists is legendary, exceeded only by the force of his dismissal of the australopithecines as having anything at all to do with human evolution. 'They are just bloody apes', he is reputed to have observed on examining the australopithecine remains in South Africa. ...Zuckerman had become extremely powerful in British science, being an adviser to the government up to the highest level. ...while at Oxford and then Birmingham universities, he had vigorously pursued a metrical and statistical approach to studying the anatomy of fossil hominids. ...it was on this basis that he underpinned his lifelong rejection of the australopithecines as human ancestors." Bones Of Contention, 1987, p.164, 165. "The australopithecine skull is in fact so overwhelmingly simian as opposed to human (figure 5) that the contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white." Beyond The Ivory Tower, p.78

 

FEET LIKE APE, A. afarensis...The recent description of four articulating foot bones from 3-3.5 Myr deposits in the South African cave site of Sterkfontein support this. ...the divergent big toe indicates some degree of prehensile grasping as in apes. Developmental patterns were also more ape-like...ecologically they may still be considered apes." Nature, 376, 8/17/1995, p.556

 

LIKE APE, William Howells, Harvard, "...the pelvis was by no means modern, nor were the feet: the toes were more curved than ours; the heel bones lacked our stabilizing tubercles; and a couple of small ligaments that, in us, tighten the arch from underneath, were apparently not present. The finger bones were curved as they are in tree-climbing apes. ...Here is something of an enigma. Excellent evidence of a very modern foot from the from the hominid footprints at Laetoli. Excellent evidence of hominid but not fully modern feet from the Afar bones. Russel Tuttle of the University of Chicago, a leading expert on hominoid gaits and limbs, finds that all aspects of the footprints, especially toe proportions, are remarkably like modern human feet and that the Afar feet are significantly less than human." Getting Here, 1993, p.79.

 

LIKE ORANGUTAN, Charles E. Oxnard, Dean of Graduate School, Prof. of Biology & Anatomy, USC, "...conventional wisdom is that the australopithecine fragments are generally rather similar to humans...the new studies point to different conclusions. The new investigations suggest that the fossil fragments are usually uniquely different from any living form: when they do have similarities with living species, they are as often as not reminiscent of the orangutan, ...these results imply that the various australopithecines are really not all that much like humans. ...may well have been bipeds,....but if so, it was not in the human manner. They may also have been quite capable climbers as much at home in the trees as on the ground." The American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, pp.273-4.

 

Like Pygmy CHIMP, Adrienne L. Zihlman, U.C. Santa Cruze, "Zihlman compares the pygmy chimpanzee to 'Lucy,' one of the oldest hominid fossils known, and finds the similarities striking. They are almost identical in body size, in stature and in brain size... These commonalities, Zihlman argues, indicate that pygmy chimps use their limbs in much the same way Lucy did..." Science News, Vol.123, 2/5. 1983, p.89

 

THE PROPAGANDA, "...this human ancestor blurred the lines between ape and human. For example... her femur from knee to hip is close to that of a modern human, implying she walked efficiently on two legs." National Geographic, 11/2006, p.151.

 

The Actual Evidence, ""...incisors are larger...and their overall morphology is similar to that of juvenile apes. The gorilla-like scapula and long and curved manual phalanges raise new questions..." The shape of the scapula resembles the scapulae of juvenile and adult gorillas... "Now that the scapula of this species can be examined in full for the first time, it is unexpected to find the strongest similarities with Gorilla...weight-bearing and terrestrial knuckle-walking...these australopith specimens can be accommodated within the range of intraspecific variation of African apes" Nature 443 (9/2006), p.296

 

LAETOLIE FOOTPRINTS "...belonged to the genus Homo (or true man), rather than to man-apes (like Australopithicus, who was once a thought to be the forerunner of man but is now regarded as a possible evolutionary dead end)...they were 3.35 million to 3.75 million years old. ...in Mary Leakey's words, be people 'not unlike ourselves.'" Time, 11/10/1975, p.93

 

LUCY'S FEET, "A. afarensis...The recent description of four articulating foot bones from 3-3.5 Myr deposits in the South African cave site of Sterkfontein support this. ...the divergent big toe indicates some degree of prehensile grasping as in apes." Nature, 376, 8/17/1995, p.556

 

SHRIVELED Status, Matt Cartmill, Duke; David Pilbeam, Harvard; Glynn Isaac, Harvard, "The australopithecines are rapidly shrinking back to the status of peculiarly specialized apes...", American Scientist, July-August 1986, p.419;

 

 

David Pilbeam, Harvard, Ed.,Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 4/10/2007, Mandibular ramus morphology on a recently discovered specimen of Australopithecus afarensis closely matches that of gorillas... The presence of the morphology in both the latter and Au. afarensis and its absence in modern humans cast doubt on the role of Au. afarensis as a modern human ancestor."

 

NEWEST ANCESTOR? "Workers at the zoo say that's when she started walking upright exclusively. ...A zoo veterinarian says he's not sure why she has altered her behaviour, speculating that the illness could have caused brain damage." CBC Health & Science News, 7/22/04

 

Failed Links: Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Java Man, Peking Man

 

BELIEVE  SEE, Roger Lewin, Ed. Re. News, Science, "How is it that trained men, the greatest experts of their day, could look at a set of modern human bones - the cranial fragments - and 'see' a clear simian signature in them; and 'see' in an ape's jaw the unmistakable signs of humanity? The answers, inevitably, have to do with the scientists' expectations and their effects on the interpretation of data. ...It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. If this were the case, then each scientist faced with the same data would necessarily reach the same conclusion. But as we've seen earlier and will see again and again, frequently this does not happen. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions." Bones Of Contention, p.61, 68

 

FRAUDULENT, Ales Hrdlicka, Smithsonian (Re: Java Man) "None of the published illustrations or casts now in various institutions is accurate." Science, 8/17/1923

 

EVIDENCE MISSING, William Howells, Harvard, "Java Man went into Dubois' locker for a time. But Peking Man seems to have gone into Davy Jones' locker, and for good. He disappeared, one of the first casualties of the war in the Pacific, half a million years after he had died the first time." Mankind In The Making, p.165

 

CONTEMPORARY, "[H. erectus] would have been alive when modern human and Neandertals roamed the earth. ...If the dates are right, we have three different species coexisting at the same time..." Science, V.274, p.1841, 12/13/1996

 

Homo erectus=Homo sapien, S.C.Anton, Anthropologist, U. of FL, "Anthropologist Milford H. Wolpoff of the University of Michigan...argue[s] that H. erectus fossils actually belong to an anatomically diverse form of H. sapiens... 'The proper way to define both a living and a fossil species is the $64,000 question,' Anton states." Science News, V.150, p.373, 12/14/1996

 

Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon Are Men

 

BAD IMAGE, Ian Tattersall, Head Dep. of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, "But quite as important as new Neatherthal finds in the 50's was the recognition, finally, that the stooped-shoulder, bent-kneed, stereotype of these humans created by Marcellin Boule was totally false." The Fossil Trail, 1995, p.101

 

EVOLUTION OR VARIATION? "...a Neanderthaler is a model of evolutionary refinement. Put him in a Brooks Brothers suit and send him down to the supermarket for some groceries and he might pass completely unnoticed. He might run a little shorter than the clerk serving him but he would not necessarily be the shortest man in the place. He might be heavier-featured, squattier and more muscular than most, but again he might be no more so than the porter handling the beer cases back in the stock room." EVOLUTION, Time-Life Nature Library.

 

REHABILITATED, Richard Leakey "...to refer to someone as 'Neandertal' was and still is to some extent, an intended insult. Rehabilitation, however, began in the mid-50s when two anatomists, William Straus and A.J.E. Cave, undertook a second reconstruction ...a body which, though somewhat stocky, was essentially like modern man's. ...The brain is slightly larger than that of modern humans... The Neandertals average height was around 1.67 meters (5 feet 8 inches). ...is unquestionably Homo sapiens. ...The arrangement of flowers was not random: they were carefully placed around the body... A concern for the fate of the human soul...ritual burial, they speak clearly of a deep feeling for the spiritual quality of life..."Making Of Mankind, 1981, p.148, 153

 

LARGER BRAIN, William Howells, Harvard, "The Neanderthal brain was most positively and definitely not smaller than our own; indeed, and this is a rather bitter pill, it appears to have been perhaps a little larger." MANKIND SO FAR, p.165

 

"FULLY HUMAN," Mat Cartmill, Duke U., President, Amererican Association of Physical Anthropology, "I tend to think they [Neanderthals] had fully human language. After all, they had larger brains than those of most modern humans, made elegant stone tools, and knew how to use tools." Discover, 11/98, p.62

 

MODERN CAME FIRST, O. Bar-Yosef, Peabody Museum, Harvard, B. Vandermeerch, U. Bordeaux, "Modern Homo sapiens preceded Neanderthals at Mt. Carmel. ...modern looking H. sapien had lived in one of the caves some 50,000 to 100,000 years ago, much earlier than such people had been thought to exist anywhere. ...The results have shaken the traditional evolutionary scenario, producing more questions than answers." Scientific American, p.94, 4/1993

 

DNA, "The genetic variation seen between the modern and Neandertal sequences is within the range of other single species of primates...'" Science, V.277, 7/11/1997, p.177

"But some researchers believe the data can be interpreted differently. ...'The amount of diversity between Neanderthals and living humans is not exceptional.'" Scientific American, 1/1998

 

PROTEIN, "...extracted and sequenced protein from a Neanderthal from Shanidar Cave, Iraq... Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, March 8, 2005, p.62

 

NEANDERTAL FLUTE, Matches Do, Re, Mi scale, Science, 5/97 p.203; Scientific American, 9/7

Man "Older" Than Proposed Ancestors

 

RUINED FAMILY TREE, "'Either we toss out this skull [1470] or we toss out our theories of early man,' asserts anthropologist Richard Leakey of this 2.8-million-year-old fossil, which he has tentatively identified as belonging to our own genus. "It simply fits no previous models of human beginnings." The author, son of famed anthropologist Louis S. B. Leakey, believes the skull's surprisingly large braincase "leaves in ruins the notion that all early fossils can be arranged in an orderly sequence of evolutionary change." National Geographic, 6/1973, p.819

 

 

Human Brain, "Leakey further describes the whole shape of the brain case [1470] as remarkably reminiscent of modern man, lacking the heavy and protruding eyebrow ridges and thick bone characteristics of Homo erectus." Science News, 102, 4/3/72, p.324

 

Human Brain, Dean Faulk, S.U.of N.Y. at Albany, "...KNM-ER 1805 [Homo habilis] should not be attributed to Homo... the shape of the endocast from KNM-ER (basal view) is similar to that from an African pongid, where as the endocast of KNM-ER 1470 is shaped like that of a modern human." Science, 221, (9/9/83) p.1073

 

Human Brain "The foremost American experts on human brain evolution - Dean Falk of the State University of New York at Albany and Ralph Holloway of Columbia University-usually disagree, but even they agree that Broca's area is present in a skull from East Turkana known as 1470 Philip Tobias...renowned brain expert from South Africa concurs." Anthro Quest: The Leakey's Foundation News. No.43 (Spring 91) p.13

 

"THE OLDEST MAN" "[African Footprints] ...they belonged to the genus Homo (or true man), rather than to man-apes (like Australopithicus, who was once a thought to be the forerunner of man but is now regarded as a possible evolutionary dead end). ...they were 3.35 million to 3.75 million years old. ...they would, in Mary Leakey's words, be people 'not unlike ourselves'..." Time, 11/10/1975, p.93

 

TOO HUMAN - TOO OLD, Russel H. Tuttle, Professor of Anthropology, U.of Chicago, Affiliate Scientist, Primate Research Center, Emory U., "In sum, the 3.5-million-year-old footprint trails at Laetoli sight G resemble those of habitually unshod modern humans. ...If the G footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus ...In any case we should shelve the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints were made by Lucy's kind..." Natural History, 3/90, p.64.

 

MODERN & TALL, Richard Leakey, "...the boy from Tukana was surprisingly large compared with modern boys his age; he could well have grown to six feet. ...he would probably go unnoticed in a crowd today. This find combines with previous discoveries of Homo erectus to contradict a long-held idea that humans have grown larger over the millennia." National Geographic, p.629, 11/1985 "...we now conclude that the Turkana boy was about nine years old when he died, and not eleven, as I'd initially supposed." Origin of Humankind, 1994, p.51

 

Man Even "Before" Lucy

 

Charles E. Oxnard, Dean, Grad. School, Prof. Bio. and Anat., USC, "...earlier finds, for instance, at Kanapoi...existed at least at the same time as, and probably even earlier than, the original gracile australopithecines... almost indistinguishable in shape from that of modern humans at four and a half million years...", American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, p.274.

 

Henry M. Mchenry, U. of C., Davis, "The results show that the Kanapoi specimen, which is 4 to 4.5 million years old, is indistinguishable from modern Homo sapiens..." Science, Vol.190, p.428.

 

William Howells, Harvard, "...with a date of about 4.4 million, [KP 271] could not be distinguished from Homo sapiens morphologically or by multivariate analysis by Patterson and myself in 1967 (or by much more searching analysis by others since then). We suggested that it might represent Australopithecus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous, although it would be the correct one without the time element.", Homo Erectus, 1981, p.79-80.

 

Racism

DARWIN WAS A RACIST, "At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated.. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." The Descent of Man, p.178

 

HAECKEL WAS A RACIST, "African Man-like Apes are black in colour, and like their countrymen, the Negroes, have the head long from back to font...The Asiatic Man-like Apes are, on the contrary mostly brown, or yellowish-brown in colour, and have the head short from front to back, like their countrymen, the Malays and Mongols." Haeckel, 1876, Vol.II, p.180

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, Stephen J. Gould, Harvard, "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1850, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory." Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 1977, pp.127-128 "Recapitulation provided a convenient focus for the pervasive racism of white scientist; they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal adult behaviors in lower races.[Quotes Henry Fairfield Osborne of American Museum of Natural History]The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old of the species Homo sapiens." Natural History, 4/1980 p.144

 

Variation within kind is observed - Evolution is not observed!

 

Click to View


Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA