View allAll Photos Tagged Think
I think this is 6SP7 Perth to Sydney 'superfreighter' passing under the Braidwood Road bridge at Goulburn, New South Wales, behind Pacific National locos NR56/NR82/NR121 on 2 October 2016.
2016 marks the 20th anniversary of the GE-powered NR class in frontline interstate service in Australia.
IMG_2778_lowres
Dating to the 1920s, IBM founder Thomas J. Watson summed his philosophy in a singular word. More on IBM THINK signs here.
The Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek has two copies of The Thinker, 1880, by Rodin. The Thinker was originally destined for the Gates of Hell monumental door that was never built but Rodin repurposed the work and reworked it in various sizes.
In this photo: The monumental, 181-cm bronze The Thinker is usually on display outside in the small garden (free access) behind the museum. It was ordered by Carl Jacobsen from Rodin in 1905.
The smaller statuette, 73.3 cm The Thinker was ordered by Carl Jacobsen from Rodin in 1900.
The two were displayed together in a special Rodin exhibition in 2021.
The Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen was founded by the owner of the Carlsberg Breweries, Carl Jacobsen (1842-1914) one of the 19th century’s great industrial magnates and patrons of the arts. Many of the museum’s sculptures and paintings were bought by Carl Jacobsen directly from the artists and were, of course, contemporary art at the time.
On display in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen, Denmark.
• Nude • Nu • Nackt • Nuda • ヌード • Nue • Desnuda • Nakinn • Nøgen • Naakt • Naken • Nud • Akt • Γυμνός • Desnudo •
...just think! would ya?
I've been seeing this particular piece of graffiti around a lot. The first time I saw it was on the trail to the top of Koko Crater and then again etched onto the railway ties while going up. Later I would see it on street signs, buildings, etc., around the Hawaii Kai area (where I live). I wondered what it meant, other than the literal meaning of the word "think!" It was written the same way in this script wherever I saw it tagged. Someone had definitely thought out its design and has some purpose for scrawling it...
While parking at Costco the other day, I saw it written on the concrete base of the light post in front of my vehicle, so I snapped it with my iPhone.
Anyway, I guess we all could pause to "think!" once in a while, eh?
So, think!
Oh, and...
H A P P Y . T H A N K S G I V I N G . E V E R Y O N E !
"Chimpanzees make tools and use them to acquire foods and for social displays; they have sophisticated hunting strategies requiring cooperation, influence and rank; they are status conscious, manipulative and capable of deception; they can learn to use symbols and understand aspects of human language including some relational syntax, concepts of number and numerical sequence; and they are capable of spontaneous planning for a future state or event." (Wikipedia)
What might these two be up to?
Best viewed on black, so please press 'L'.
Enjoy!
flickrversary #6....can you believe it?
(just to clarify...its since I first heard of flickr....first photo posted Dec 2006 I think)
This tranquil scene of 40 years ago might stir considerable nostalgia.
İstanbul in 1976 was peaceful, safe and - interesting. Very interesting. Imagine my great surprise when asked - by a teller at the bank where I was changing money - "What do you think of white Americans?"
(Eartha Kitt, the great African-American singer and actress, might have remarked, "Oh, those Turks!"
(Miss Kitt recorded a classic Turkish folk song, "Kâtıbim," in 1953; it is known in the U.S. as "Uska Dara (A Turkish Tale);" "Uska Dara" = Üsküdar'a, as in" Üsküdar'a gider iken." A "YouTube" audio is here. A "YouTube" clip of a 1967 television performance is here. Also of interest: "Üsküdar Vapurunda "Katibim" Sürprizi.")
Nostalgia aside, this photograph belies the political atmosphere of the times. The first "Nationalist Front" cabinet (Milliyetçi Cephe Hükûmetleri), a four-party coalition government organized by Süleyman Demirel during 1975, would collapse during 1977. Demirel's "Second Nationalist Front" cabinet (2. Milliyetçi Cephe Hükûmeti) would last for an even shorter interval . . .
In that era, pre-Internet, pre-social media (e.g. Twitter), a visitor who did not read the news might have come to İstanbul, stayed for a few days and then departed, all the while remaining blissfully unaware of Turkey's ongoing political turmoil.
UPDATE: I made the original scan of this image with the scanner set for too low of a resolution. I've made a "rescan" and uploaded it above (2021 October 27).
1976 August 4.
Tall Brunette Swimsuit Bikini Model Goddess with Long, Pretty Legs! Nikon D800 + 70-200mm F2.8 VR2 Nikkor Zoom Lens Photos ! Lightroom 5 !
Pretty hazel brown eyes! Nikon D800 photos of a Swimsuit Bikini Model Goddess! Pretty brunette with pretty blue eyes! You've seen her in movies!
And here're a couple of HD video movies I shot of the goddess with the Nikon D800:
Enjoy! Be sure to watch in the full 1080P HD!
The epic goddess was tall, thin, fit, tan, and in wonderful shape (as you can see).
Check out my greatest hits compilation, and let me know what you think:
www.elliotmcguckenphotography.com/45surf/45SURF-Heros-Jou...
As the Great Mick Jagger satted, "Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, girl
Pretty, pretty
Such a pretty, pretty, pretty girl." -Beast of Burden Sexy, hot, and cute too!
Epic Goddess Straight Out of Hero's Journey Mythology! Pretty Model! :) Tall, thin, fit and beautiful!
Welcome to your epic hero's journey! The beautiful 45surf goddess sisters hath called ye to adventure, beckoning ye to read deeply Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, whence ye shall learn of yer own exalted artistic path guided by Hero's Journey Mythology. I wouldn't be saying it if it hadn't happened to me.
New 500px!
500px.com/herosjourneymythology
New instagram! instagram.com/45surf
Pretty Swimsuit Bikini Model Goddess! :)
Join/like my facebook page! www.facebook.com/45surfHerosJourneyMythology
Follow me on facebook! facebook.com/elliot.mcgucken
Nikon D300 Photos of Beautfiul Sexy Hot Brunette!
She was a beauty--a gold 45 goddess for sure! A Gold 45 Goddess exalts the archetypal form of Athena--the Greek Goddess of wisdom, warfare, strategy, heroic endeavour, handicrafts and reason. A Gold 45 Goddess guards the beauty of dx4/dt=ic and embodies 45SURF's motto "Virtus, Honoris, et Actio Pro Veritas, Amor, et Bellus, (Strength, Honor, and Action for Truth, Love, and Beauty," and she stands ready to inspire and guide you along your epic, heroic journey into art and mythology. It is Athena who descends to call Telemachus to Adventure in the first book of Homer's Odyssey--to man up, find news of his true father Odysseus, and rid his home of the false suitors, and too, it is Athena who descends in the first book of Homer's Iliad, to calm the Rage of Achilles who is about to draw his sword so as to slay his commander who just seized Achilles' prize, thusly robbing Achilles of his Honor--the higher prize Achilles fought for. And now Athena descends once again, assuming the form of a Gold 45 Goddess, to inspire you along your epic journey of heroic endeavour.
ALL THE BEST on your Epic Hero's Journey from Johnny Ranger McCoy!
Shot with the Nikon D800 and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens.
Modeling the Gold 45 Revolver Gold'N'Virtue swimsuit. :)
A laid-back,classic, socal lifestyle shoot!
Reading the Great Books and Classics inclduing Homer, Shakespeare, and Herman Meville's Moby Dick!
With the black 45SURF surfboard!
May the 45surf goddesses inspire you along am artistic journey of your own making!
Join/like/follow my new facebook photography page!
While Cami was at Boolster's Brew relaying to Kira how her father Jeffrey has been asking her to think about her future -- and not be like Aunt Marie -- he was at his tenant's property, speculating that Mr. Zippy knew zip about appliances.
"How long has he been here?"
Edna looked over at Jimmy flipping through the pages of his manual, trying to follow every "if, then" step.
"About 30 minutes?"
"I have it!" Jimmy said. "At least I think I do. Your clicking noise is not resulting in a loss of air temperature; therefore, I should replace your water filter....at least I think that's what I should do."
I think this was taken at the Freeman home in California, but I don't know when or what the circumstances were...
I'm pretty sure it's Marvin Yourdon in the background on the left, ad Ike Yourdon wearing the hat in the background on the right. My grandmother Mabel is in the front row with a print dress ...
I have no idea who the other people were.
Wherever this was taken, it was definitely not the mining camps in Colorado or Utah
*********************************
To the best of my knowledge, most of the photos in this Flickr album were taken by my grandmother, Mabel Yourdon, during the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. Most of them depict scenes of everyday life in mining camps and small towns near the Utah-Colorado border. Some of them show hunting, fishing, and camping trips in unspecified parts of the American west. It appears that a few of them were taken in southern California, when Mabel and her husband Ike traveled out there to visit relatives.
I have no idea what kind of camera Mabel used for these photos, nor what kind of film. There probably wasn’t that much variety available in the 1920s, and she was not a “professional” photographer. So it may have been a Brownie and whatever B/W film Kodak was selling at the time.
My stepfather, Ray Yourdon, was born in 1922; and his older brother, Marvin, was born two years before that. You’ll see photos of Ray and Marvin when they were young boys, when they were in high school, and when they went off to join the Navy and the Marines to fight in World War II.
Somewhere around 2005, I asked Ray if he could tell me the details of some of the photos; where possible, I have included those details in the notes for the photos. Some of the photos obviously evoked pleasant memories, and I heard stories about minor day-to-day events in his life that I had never heard before. But we rarely got through more than a few pictures before he ran out of energy; and so many of the photos have no explanation at all.
At this point, my parents and grandparents are all gone. I have cousins who grew up in the same area where these photos were taken, and one or two of them are still in that area. They may be able to fill in a few of the details; otherwise, you’ll just have to accept these photos as a glimpse of what life was like nearly a hundred years ago ...
"We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we will always be free."
- Ronald Reagan
It's Been Awhile,World of Macro photography. How I miss Capturing Small things. Just this day, or should I say an Hour ago, I just got an Urge to Do some macro. So I stood up, got my Camera, and got my Bag of DIY Macro Gears and Tools. Went Out. Took a walk, and by Surprise, I saw this Little Guy, walking down. It's actually my First Time To see a White Jumping Spider, and Also by surprise, It only got me a couple of shots to get these Marvelous Pictures, It didn't played tricks on me, or tried to jump away, runaway or anything. It was just there Posing in front of the Camera. What a Delightful Creature. I wanna Share this to the World!
Thanks to Shartus Sarmiento.
© All rights reserved.
I think I am now back into sequence with my uploads.
This attractive moth was seen on one of the moth sheets on our first morning at this lodge.
As always any help with ID would be welcome.
Created for MMM Special October Challenge to Raise Awareness for Breast Cancer
With thanks to…
Source image - Mimitalks
Background - Joes Sistah
Hair ~ CindysArt
=====================================
=====================================
I think this is the new Bow Wow Trad but these are not her stock clothes. They are a part of the set Fall Whisper.
I think this is the new Bow Wow Trad but these are not her stock clothes. They are a part of the set Fall Whisper.
.I think I like my Pique head sculpt best for this body! Many of the other heads I have seem too small! I took a ton of photos that I will post but not all at once!
French postcard by E.P.I., Pornichet, no. SN4. Photo: Fotogram Stone. Caption: Pense a moi! (Think of me!)
Join now our group Vintage Bikini Postcards. And take a look at our albums Sizzling Swimwear Postcards, Va-Va-Va-Voom Vintage Pin-ups, Beefcake, Beautiful Bikini Beach Babes and It's a Bikini World .
A pause to think while taking a break during a crazy period at work.
This has turned out to be a very popular photo. If you use it in a blog / article, please post the link below in the comments so I can see.
Thanks!
"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977)
On behalf of Britain, I ask the whole world to accept the sincere apologies of the British people, for the damage done to science by Charles Darwin.
Britain has a great scientific heritage, having produced some of the world's finest, and greatest scientists. However, Britain's enormous contribution to science has been seriously sullied by the false ideas popularised by Charles Darwin, which have led to a serious decline in scientific integrity, and spawned a whole catalogue of fakes, frauds and very dubious science.
Although it has been evident for some time that Darwinian, progressive evolution is not scientifically credible, and that there is a great deal of evidence against it, the idea has now developed a life of its own, and has become an essential lynch pin in an ideological agenda. As a consequence, there is no longer any normal, scientific objectivity permitted and Darwinism has become uniquely sacrosanct. This is very damaging to genuine scientific endeavour, and has the effect of creating a virtual straitjacket, for any field of research that is likely to have any adverse implications for Darwinism.
So, what is the truth about Darwinian, progressive (microbes to human) evolution?
The fact is, as we will show later, there is no credible mechanism for progressive evolution.
What exactly was the erroneous idea that Darwin popularised?
Darwin believed that there is unlimited variability in the gene pool of all creatures and plants. And that this unlimited variabilty has, over vast time, transformed an original, living cell into humans (and every other living thing) through natural selection of beneficial and advantageous traits.
However, the changes possible were well known by selective breeders to be strictly limited.
This is because the changes seen in selective breeding are due to the shuffling, deletion and emphasis of genetic information already existing in the gene pool (micro-evolution). There is no viable mechanism for creating new, beneficial, genetic information required to create entirely new structures and features (macro-evolution), or to create the massive amount of new information required to transform an original, single living cell into all the complex, life forms (including humans) that exist.
Darwin rashly ignored the limits which were well known to breeders (even though he selectively bred pigeons himself, and should have known better). He simply extrapolated the strictly limited, minor changes observed in selective breeding to major, unlimited, progressive changes able to create new structures, organs etc. through natural selection, over millions of years.
Of course, the length of time involved made no difference, the existing, genetic information could not increase of its own accord, no matter how long the timescale.
That was a gigantic flaw in Darwinism, and opponents of Darwin's ideas tried to argue that changes were limited, as selective breeding had demonstrated. But because Darwinism had acquired a status more akin to an ideology than purely, objective science, belief in the Darwinian idea outweighed the verdict of observational and experimental science, and classical Darwinism became firmly established as scientific orthodoxy for nearly a century.
Opponents continued to argue all this time, that Darwinism was unscientific nonsense, but they were ostracised and dismissed as cranks, weirdoes or religious fanatics.
Finally however, it was discovered that the opponents of Darwin were perfectly correct - and that constructive, genetic changes (progressive, macro-evolution) require new, additional, genetic information.
This looked like the ignominious end of Darwinism, as there was no credible, natural mechanism able to create new, constructive, genetic information. And Darwinism should have been heading for the dustbin of history,
However, rather than ditch the whole idea, the vested interests in Darwinism had become so great, with numerous, lifelong careers and an ideological agenda which had become dependant on the Darwinian belief system, a desperate attempt was made to rescue it from its justified demise.
A mechanism had to be invented to explain the origin of new, constructive information.
That invented mechanism was 'mutations'. Mutations are ... genetic, copying MISTAKES.
The general public had already been convinced that classical Darwinism was a scientific fact, and that anyone who questioned it was a crank, so all that had to be done, as far as the public was concerned, was to give the impression that the theory had simply been refined and updated in the light of modern science.
The fact that classical Darwinism had been wrong all along, and was fatally flawed from the outset was kept quiet. This meant that the opponents of Darwinism, who had been right all along, and were the real champions of science, continued to be vilified as cranks and scorned by the mass media and establishment.
The new developments were simply portrayed as the evolution and development of the theory. The impression was given that there was nothing wrong with the idea of progressive (macro) evolution, it had simply 'evolved' and 'improved' in the light of greater knowledge.
A sort of progressive evolution of the idea of evolution.
This new, 'improved' Darwinism became known as Neo-Darwinism.
So what is Neo-Darwinism? And did it really solve the fatal flaws of the Darwinian idea?
Neo Darwinism is progressive, macro evolution - as Darwin had proposed, but based on the ludicrous idea that random mutations (accidental, genetic, copying mistakes) selected by natural selection, can provide the constructive, genetic information capable of creating entirely new features, anatomical structures, organs, and biological systems. In other words, it is macro evolution based on a belief in a total progression from microbes to man through billions of random, genetic, copying MISTAKES, over millions of years.
However, there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and it is should be classified as unscientific nonsense which defies logic, the laws of probability, the law of cause and effect and Information Theory.
People can be confused, because they know that 'micro'-evolution is an observable fact, which everyone accepts. However, evolutionists cynically exploit that confusion by frequently citing obvious examples of micro-evolution such as: the Peppered Moth, Darwin's finches, so-called superbugs etc., as evidence of macro-evolution.
Of course such examples are not evidence of macro-evolution at all. The public is being hoodwinked, and it is a disgrace to science. There are no observable examples or evidence of macro-evolution and no examples of a mutation, or a series of mutations capable of creating entirely new structures, body parts, organs etc. and that is a fact. It is no wonder that W R Thompson stated in the preface to the 1959 centenary edition of Darwin's Origin of the Species, that ... the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity.
Micro-evolution is simply the small changes which take place, through natural selection or selective breeding, but only within the strict limits of the built-in variability of the existing gene pool. Any constructive changes outside the extent of the existing gene pool requires a credible mechanism for the creation of new, beneficial, genetic information, that is essential for macro evolution.
Micro evolution does not involve or require the creation of any new, genetic information. So micro evolution and macro evolution are entirely different. There is no connection between them at all, whatever evolutionists may claim.
Once people fully understand that the differences they see in various dogs breeds, for example, are merely an example of limited micro-evolution (selection of existing genetic information) and nothing to do with progressive macro-evolution, they begin to realise that they have been fed an incredible story. The dogs remain dogs and will always remain dogs, hundreds of years of experiment and observation through selective breeding confirms that.
To explain further.... Neo-Darwinian, macro evolution is the incredible notion that everything in the genome of humans and every living thing past and present (apart from the original genetic information in the very first living cell) is the result of the accumulation of millions of genetic, copying mistakes..... mutations accruing upon previous mutations .... on and, and on, and on.
In other words, Neo-Darwinism proposes that the complete genome (every scrap of genetic information in the DNA) of every living thing that has ever lived was created by a long series ... of mistakes upon mistakes .... of mistakes .... of mistakes etc. etc.
If we look at the whole picture we soon realise that what is actually being proposed by evolutionists is that, apart from the original information in the first living cell (and evolutionists have yet to explain where that original information came from?) - every additional scrap of genetic information for all - features, structures, body parts, systems and processes that exist, or have ever existed in all living things, such as:
skin, bones, bone joints, shells, flowers, leaves, wings, scales, muscles, fur, hair, teeth, claws, toe and finger nails, horns, beaks, nervous systems, blood, blood vessels, brains, lungs, hearts, digestive systems, vascular systems, liver, kidneys, pancreas, bowels, immune systems, senses, eyes, ears, sex organs, sexual reproduction, sperm, eggs, pollen, the process of metamorphosis, marsupial pouches, marsupial embryo migration, mammary glands, hormone production, melanin etc. .... have been created from scratch, by an incredibly long series of small, accumulated mistakes ... mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - over and over again, millions of times. That is ... every part, system and process of all living things are the result of literally billions of genetic MISTAKES of MISTAKES, accumulated over many millions of years.
So what we are asked to believe is that something like a vascular system, or reproductive organs, developed in small, random, incremental steps, with every step being the result of a copying mistake, and with each step being able to provide a significant survival or reproductive advantage in order to be preserved and become dominant in the gene pool. Incredible!
If you believe that ... you will believe anything.
Even worse, evolutionists have yet to cite a single example of a positive, beneficial, mutation which adds constructive information to the genome of any creature. Yet they expect us to believe that we have been converted from an original, single living cell into humans by an accumulation of billions of beneficial mutations (mistakes).
Conclusion:
Progressive, microbes-to-man evolution is impossible - there is no credible mechanism to produce all the new, genetic information which is essential for that to take place.
The evolution story is an obvious fairy tale presented as scientific fact.
However, nothing has changed - those who dare to question Neo-Darwinism are still portrayed as idiots, retards, cranks, weirdoes, anti-scientific ignoramuses or religious fanatics.
Want to join the club?
What about the fossil record?
The formation of fossils.
Books explaining how fossils are formed frequently give the impression that it takes many years of build up of layers of sediment to bury organic remains, which then become fossilised.
Therefore many people don't realise that this impression is erroneous, because it is a fact that all good, intact fossils require rapid burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction.
So it is evident that rock containing good, undamaged fossils was laid down rapidly, sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of intact fossils is a testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
You don't get fossils from slow burial. Organic remains don't just sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a long period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several or many strata (sometimes called layers) which clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed simultaneously in a single event by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not stratum by stratum over long periods of time or different geological eras, which is the evolutionist's, uniformitarian interpretation of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person claim that strata or, for that matter, any fossil bearing rock, could have taken millions of years to form?
You don't even need to be a qualified sedimentologist or geologist to come to that conclusion, it is common sense.
Rapid formation of strata - latest evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
Living Fossils - when NO evidence IS evidence.
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/
What about all the claimed scientific evidence that evolutionists have found for evolution?
The evolutionist 'scientific' method has resulted in a serious decline in scientific integrity, and has given us such scientific abominations as:
Piltdown Man (a fake),
Nebraska Man (a pig),
South West Colorado Man (a horse),
Orce man (a donkey),
Embryonic Recapitulation (a fraud),
Archaeoraptor (a fake),
Java Man (a giant gibbon),
Peking Man (a monkey),
Montana Man (an extinct dog-like creature)
Nutcracker Man (an extinct type of ape - Australopithecus)
The Horse Series (unrelated species cobbled together),
Peppered Moth (faked photographs)
The Orgueil meteorite (faked evidence)
Etc. etc.
Anyone can call anything 'science' ... it doesn't make it so.
All these examples were trumpeted by evolutionists as scientific evidence for evolution.
Do we want to trust evolutionists claims about scientific evidence, when they have such an appalling record?
Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?
www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...
Piltdown Man reigned for over 40 years, as a supreme example of human evolution, before it was exposed as a crudely, fashioned fake.
Is that 'science'?
The ludicrous Hopeful Monster Theory and so-called Punctuated Equilibrium (evolution in big jumps) were invented by evolutionists as a desperate attempt to explain away the lack of fossil evidence for evolution. They are proposed methods of evolution which, it is claimed, need no fossil evidence. They are actually an admission that the required fossil evidence does not exist.
Piltdown Man... survived as alleged proof of evolution for over 40 years in evolution textbooks and was taught in schools and universities, it survived peer reviews etc. and used as supposed, irrefutable evidence for evolution at the famous Scopes Trial (subject of the film 'Inherit the Wind').
Nebraska Man, this was a single tooth of a peccary. it was trumpeted as scientific evidence for the evolution of humans, and artists impressions of an ape-like man appeared in newspapers magazines etc. Such 'scientific' evidence is enough to make any genuine, respectable scientist weep. Having been found 3 years earlier, it was 'resurrected' by evolutionists just before the Scopes Trial in order to influence public opinion in advance of the trial.
South West Colorado Man, another tooth .... of a horse this time... It was presented as evidence for human evolution.
Orce man, a fragment of skullcap, which was most likely from a donkey, but even if it was human. such a tiny fragment is certainly not any proof of human evolution as it was made out to be.
Embryonic Recapitulation, the evolutionist zealot Ernst Haeckel (who was a hero of Hitler) published fraudulent drawings of embryos and his theory was readily accepted by evolutionists as proof of evolution. Even after he was exposed as a fraudster, evolutionists still continued to use his fraudulent evidence in books and publications on evolution, including school textbooks, until very recently.
Archaeoraptor, A so-called feathered dinosaur from the Chinese fossil faking industry. It managed to fool credulous evolutionists, because it was exactly what they were looking for. The evidence fitted the wishful thinking.
Java Man, Dubois, the man who discovered Java Man and declared it a human ancestor ..... admitted much later that it was actually a giant gibbon, however, that spoilt the evolution story which had been built up around it, so evolutionists were reluctant to get rid of it, and still maintained it was a human ancestor. Dubois had also 'forgotten' to mention that he found the bones of modern humans at the same site.
Peking Man, made up from monkey skulls which were found in an ancient limestone burning industrial site where there were crushed monkey skulls and modern human bones. Drawings were made of Peking Man, but the original skull conveniently disappeared. So that allowed evolutionists to continue to use it as evidence without fear of it ever being debunked.
The Horse Series, unrelated species cobbled together, They were from different continents and were in no way a proper series of intermediates, They had different numbers of ribs etc. and the very first in the line, is similar to a creature alive today - the Hyrax.
Peppered Moth, moths were glued to trees to fake photographs for the peppered moth evidence. They don't normally rest on trees in daytime. In any case, the selection of a trait which is part of the variability of the existing gene pool, is not progressive evolution. It is just normal, natural selection within limits, which no-one disputes.
The Orgueil meteorite, organic material and even plant seeds were embedded and glued into the Orgueil meteorite and disguised with coal dust to make them look like part of the original meteorite, in a fraudulent attempt to fool the world into believing in the discredited idea of spontaneous generation of life, which is essential for progressive evolution to get started. The reasoning being that, if it could be shown that there was life in space, spontaneous generation must have happened there and could therefore be declared by evolutionists as being a scientific fact.
Is macro evolution even science? The answer to that has to be an emphatic - NO!
The usual definition of science is: that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Evolution cannot be proved, or tested; it is claimed to have happened in the past, and, as such, it is not subject to the scientific method. It is merely a belief.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs, especially if there is a wealth of evidence to support them, but they should not be presented as scientific fact. As we have shown, in the case of progressive evolution, there is a wealth of evidence against it. Nevertheless, we are told by evolutionist zealots that microbes to man evolution is a fact and likewise the spontaneous generation of life from sterile matter. They are deliberately misleading the public on both counts. Evolution is not only not a fact, it is not even proper science.
You don't need a degree in rocket science to understand that Darwinism has damaged and undermined science.
However, what does the world's, most famous, rocket scientist (the father of modern rocket science) have to say?
Wernher von Braun (1912 – 1977) PhD Aerospace Engineering
"In recent years, there has been a disturbing trend toward scientific dogmatism in some areas of science. Pronouncements by notable scientists and scientific organizations about "only one scientifically acceptable explanation" for events which are clearly outside the domain of science -- like all origins are -- can only destroy the curiosity of those who must carry on the future work of science. Humility, a seemingly natural product of studying nature, appears to have largely disappeared -- at least its visibility is clouded from the public's viewpoint.
Extrapolation backward in time until there are no physical artifacts of certainty that can be examined, requires sophisticated guessing which scientists prefer to refer to as "inference." Since hypotheses, a product of scientific inference, are virtually the stuff that comprises the cutting edge of scientific progress, inference must constantly be nurtured. However, the enthusiasm that encourages inference must be matched in degree with caution that clearly differentiates inference from what the public so readily accepts as "scientific fact." Failure to keep these two factors in balance can lead either to a sterile or a seduced science. 'Science but not Scientists' (2006) p.xi"
And the eminent scientist, William Robin Thompson (1887 - 1972) Entomologist and Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada, who was asked to write the introduction of the centenary edition of Darwin's 'Origin', wrote:
"The concept of organic Evolution is very highly prized by biologists, for many of whom it is an object of genuinely religious devotion, because they regard it as a supreme integrative principle. This is probably the reason why the severe methodological criticism employed in other departments of biology has not yet been brought to bear against evolutionary speculation." 'Science and Common Sense' (1937) p.229
“As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists … because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to
the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of evolutionists show that they think this unreasonable.
This situation, where scientific men rally to the defence of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and unwise in science.”
Prof. W. R. Thompson, F.R.S., introduction to the 1956 edition of Darwin's 'Origin of the Species'
"When I was asked to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Anthony Keith [one of the "discoverers" of Piltdown Man], I felt extremely hesitant to accept the invitation . . I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial. If arguments fail to resist analysis, consent should be withheld and a wholesale conversion due to unsound argument must be regarded as deplorable. He fell back on speculative arguments.
"He merely showed, on the basis of certain facts and assumptions, how this might have happened, and as he had convinced himself he was able to convince others.
"But the facts and interpretations on which Darwin relied have now ceased to convince.
"This general tendency to eliminate, by means of unverifiable speculations, the limits of the categories Nature presents to us is the inheritance of biology from The Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by the theory, historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking. Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis, where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."—*W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," to Everyman’s Library issue of Charles Darwin, Origin of Species (1958 edition).
"The evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but rather is a serious obstruction to biological research. It obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results, even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built up."—*H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbildng, 1954, p. 11
Berkeley University law professor, Philip Johnson, makes the following points: “(1) Evolution is grounded not on scientific fact, but on a philosophical belief called naturalism; (2) the belief that a large body of empirical evidence supports evolution is an illusion; (3) evolution is itself a religion; and, (4) if evolution were a scientific hypothesis based on rigorous study of the evidence, it would have been abandoned long ago.”
Video clip:
Famous, militant atheist, Richard Dawkins tries to define 'nothing' as 'something', and is surprised and shocked when the audience sensibly reacts with laughter.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6H9XirkhZY
Dr James Tour - 'The Origin of Life' - Abiogenesis decisively refuted.
FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE
The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins
www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...
"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."
kgov.com/big-bang-predictions
You'll probably think it's unusual to take a shot of a building in portrait, I photoed both way, but for some reason just like this photo best with the chimneys and plant pots, hope you like it too.
Designed by the Messel family as a place to escape London life and enjoy the gardens, Nymans was a 'Dream House' of creativity and fun. Outstanding 20th-century garden, set around a romantic house and ruins, in beautiful woodland. The house was partially destroyed by fire in 1947 and the romantic ruins of a fairytale gothic mansion remain. We are one of the National Trust's most eco- friendly properties and we aim to inspire a more sustainable way of living.
Nymans, Handcross, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, is an English garden developed by three generations of the Messel family, from the late 19th century, and brought to renown by Col. Leonard C.R. Messel.
Nymans, since 1953 a National Trust property, is the origin of many sports, selections and hybrids, both planned and serendipitous, some of which can be identified by the term nymanensis, "of Nymans". Eucryphia à nymansensis (E. cordifolia à E. glutinosa) is also known as E. "Nymansay". Magnolia à loebneri 'Leonard Messel', Camellia 'Maud Messel' and Forsythia suspensa 'Nymans', with its bronze young stems, are all familiar shrub to gardeners.
In the late 19th century, Ludwig Messel, a member of an unusually creative German family settled in England, bought the Nymans estate, a house set in 600 acres on a sloping site overlooking the picturesque High Weald of Sussex, to make a setting for family life and entertainments, with Arts and Crafts-inspired "garden room" planning where topiary features contrast with new plants from temperate zones around the world. Messel's head gardener from 1895 was James Comber, whose expertise helped form plant collections at Nymans of camellias, rhododendrons, which here, unusually at the time, were combined with plantings of heather (Erica) eucryphias and magnolias. William Robinson advised in establishing the Wild Garden.
His son Lt. Col. Leonard Messel, succeeding to the property in 1915, replaced the non-descript Regency house with the picturesque stone manor, designed by Sir Walter Tapper and Norman Evill in a mellow late Gothic/Tudor style. He and his wife Maude extended the garden to the north and subscribed to seed collecting expeditions in the Himalayas and South America. The garden reached a peak in the 1930s and was regularly opened to the public. The severe reduction of staff in World War II was followed in 1947 by a disastrous fire in the house, which survives as a garden ruin.
The house was partially rebuilt and became the home of Leonard Messel's daughter Anne Messel and her second husband the 6th Earl of Rosse. At Leonard Messel's death in 1953 it was willed to the National Trust with 275 acres of woodland, one of the first gardens taken on by the Trust. Lady Rosse continued to serve as Garden Director.
The garden suffered much damage in the Great Storm of October 1987, losing 486 mature trees and many of the shrubs. The pinetum, one of the garden's earliest features, was destroyed. Restorations are ongoing.
Nymans, Handcross, Haywards Heath, Sussex RH17 6EB