More Evidence That Evolutionists Do Not Know What In The Hell They Are Talking About....

The story behind the letter below is that a man in Newport, R.I.,
 Scott Williams, digs things out of his backyard and sends the stuff
 he finds to the Smithsonian Institute, labeling them with scientific
 names and insisting they are actual archaeological finds. Here's an
 actual response from the Smithsonian Institute:

 Smithsonian Institute
 207 Pennsylvania Avenue
 Washington, DC 20078

 Dear Mr. Williams:

 Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled
 "93211-D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post... Hominid skull."

 We have given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and
 regret to inform you that we disagree with your theory that it
 represents conclusive proof of the presence of Early Man in
 Charleston County two million years ago. Rather, it appears that what
 you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety that one
 of our staff, who has small children, believes to be "Malibu Barbie."

 It is evident that you have given a great deal of thought to the
 analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite certain that those of
 us who are familiar with your prior work in the field were loathe to
 come to contradiction with your findings. However, we do feel that
 there are a number of physical attributes of the specimen that might
 have tipped you off to its modern origin:

 1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are
 typically fossilized bone.

 2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic
 centimeters, well below the threshold of even the earliest identified

 3. The dentition pattern evident on the skull is more consistent with
 the common domesticated dog than it is with the ravenous man-eating
 Pliocene clams you speculate roamed the wetlands during that time.

 This latter finding is certainly one of the most intriguing
 hypotheses you have submitted in your history with this institution,
 but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it. Without
 going into too much detail, let us say that:

 A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has chewed

 B. Clams don't have teeth. It is with feelings tinged with melancholy
 that we must deny your request to have the specimen carbon-dated.
 This is partially due to the heavy load our lab must bear in its
 normal operation, and partly due to carbon dating's notorious
 inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic record.

 To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were produced prior to
 AD 1956, and carbon dating is likely to produce wildly inaccurate
 results. Sadly, we must also deny your request that we approach the
 National Science Foundation Phylogeny Department with the concept of
 assigning your specimen the scientific name Australopithecus

 Speaking personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the
 acceptance of your proposed taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down
 because the species name you selected was hyphenated, and didn't
 really sound like it might be Latin. However, we gladly accept your
 generous donation of this fascinating specimen to the museum. While
 it is undoubtedly not a Hominid fossil, it is, nonetheless, yet
 another riveting example of the great body of work you seem to
 accumulate here so effortlessly.

 You should know that our director has reserved a special shelf in his
 own office for the display of the specimens you have previously
 submitted to the Institute, and the entire staff speculates daily on
 what you will happen upon next in your digs at the site you have
 discovered in your Newport backyard.

 We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's capital that you
 proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing the
 director to pay for it.

 We are particularly interested in hearing you expand on your theories
 surrounding the trans-positating fillifitation of ferrous metal in a
 structural matrix that makes the excellent juvenile tyrannosaurus rex
 femur you recently discovered take on the deceptive appearance of a
 rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.

 Yours in Science,
 Harvey Rowe
 Chief Curator-Antiquities

Home ] Up ]