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
proto-homonids.
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
on.
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
spiff-arino.
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