The Evidence and The Conclusions. Anthropologist Found to Be Falsifying Evidence for 30 Years

Evidence & Conclusions

I recently saw this article about Professor Reiner Protsch. He taught at a German university for the last 30 years.  And it turns out that his status as an expert in dating various anthropological finds is not only suspect, he has been shown to be a complete fraud. Indeed many of his “facts” were manufactured.

According to Thomas Terberger, the archaeologist who discovered the hoax, “Anthropology is going to have to completely revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago.”

Wow.

It seems that in spite of “peer review” the scientific community is really vulnerable to people manufacturing “evidence” to fill in the gaps for conclusions they have already made.  This is true even when their experts don’t even know how to run a carbon dating machine.  And it can go on for decades. The key is that the lies have to fit in with what the scientific community wants to believe. If your lies are inside the box they probably won’t be questioned. In fact it was only when a huge amount of money was at stake that someone started doing some fact checking.  Others have been challenging the “sacred cow” of peer review as being unreliable.

After I stopped laughing (because I have met more than my share of arrogant, table-pounding scientists), I realized that this is actually a sad situation for everyone.  It is horrible when the truth is handled this way.   It should lead the rest of us to  be skeptical of what we are told, even by the “experts.”  And while peer review is important, and the concept is admirable, we can’t even assume that 30 years of peer review in the “hard sciences” is fool proof.  Many well intended scientists like to speak as if their pronouncements are beyond questioning, that they are the only source of pure knowledge.  I would like to think that this will chasten the scientific community into a place of greater humility, but I am not holding my breath.

This is the conversation that came to mind when I read the article:

Skeptic: Do you believe in evolution?
Evolutionist: Not really. It is a fact. I believe in evolution the same way I believe in gravity.  Anyone that even questions evolution is clearly a blind religious zealot with no regard for the facts.
Skeptic: Why do you say it is a “fact?”
Evolutionist: Besides the obvious reality that the vast majority of scientists believe it, there is all the evidence. It is incontrovertible. Let me give you some examples….
Skeptic: So since you believe in evolution because of the evidence, if the evidence changed, or it was found to be incorrect or falsified, then obviously you would change your position that evolution is a fact.
Evolutionist: Well… not exactly. I might change what I believe about how evolution happened, but not THAT it happened.  It is undeniable that all living creatures descended from common ancestors.
Skeptic: Why do you say that it is “undeniable that all living creatures descended from common ancestors” by evolution?
Evolutionist: Because of the evidence.
Skeptic: So if you learned that the much of evidence that lead you to believe that “all living creatures descended from common ancestors” turned out to be totally incorrect, or worse an intentional lie, you would still believe it anyway? You wouldn’t be willing to rethink your conclusion? You would just rearrange some of the details? Is there any finding that would urge you to rethink your position?
Evolutionist: Why do you hate science?

Corroborating Evidence. Why I Don’t Believe The Planned Parenthood Videos Are A Lie

corroborating evidence

A number of people have expressed suspicion about the recent Planned Parenthood videos, even calling them “deceptive.” It seems that many of us are eager to give the abortion industry the benefit of the doubt. We don’t want believe that such terrible things can be happening just up the street, paid for by your income taxes, defended by our darling political candidates.

There are a few people that I have read that seem like they are attempting to evaluate the facts without bias. For instance Tim Stanley at the Telegraph wrote a piece on the current scandal.  He travels around debating pro-lifers. He is an abortion apologist and he is disgusted by what has been happening. He writes,

“The Planned Parenthood scandal isn’t about whether or not abortion should be legal. It’s about medical ethics, big money politics and public morality. You can be pro-choice and still feel sick to your stomach about it.”

There are others like Camille Paglia who wrote, 

“Now I am a former member of Planned Parenthood and a strong supporter of unconstrained reproductive rights. But I was horrified and disgusted by those videos and immediately felt there were serious breaches of medical ethics in the conduct of Planned Parenthood officials.”

But most of the voices I hear coming from the prochoice side of the discussion are vigorously defending Planned Parenthood as if that organization cannot be separated from women’s rights.  We are often eager to believe that corporations could be corrupt and unethical, but not this corporation. And so there is an eagerness to denounce the video evidence the way conspiracy theorists deny the lunar landing. But in this case it may be worse because many have rushed to defend Planned Parenthood but admit they haven’t even watched the videos

This account below from Abby Johnson is an example of one of the reasons I don’t believe they are deceptive. I suppose it is not really just a “reason” but more like a category of evidence. They match up with what many other former PP employees have said. There is A LOT of corroborating evidence.

By the way I recently learned about an investigative report from 15 years ago done by 20/20 that pretty much reveals the same thing. Though not from “pro-life extremists.”

Abby Johnson was a director for Planned Parenthood and she left the organization when she realized the horror of abortions. You can read her story in “Unplanned.”

She writes (about abortion in general not necessarily fetal tissue donation in this quote) on her Facebook Page,

“I remember one day at Planned Parenthood we were standing around in the POC lab talking about how far along Warren Hern performed abortions (he performs them up until the date of birth in Colorado). I remember my boss laughing and saying, “He aborts them so far along they come out crying and looking for their mama.” Everyone in the room laughed as she made the motion of holding a baby up and spanking it’s bottom. I went to a friend of mine and asked her what she thought of aborting babies so late…I had always been uncomfortable with late term abortion. She said, “Well, it’s better to kill them before they are put in a dumpster.” And that was how I then began to justify late term abortion in my mind…”better than in a dumpster.” 

Since leaving Planned Parenthood, that conversation has always haunted me…how easily I could justify something so heinous. I have since learned that if you have to justify something, then you probably shouldn’t believe in it. 

Thank God for redemption and mercy.”

The videos echo what a number of present and former abortion providers have been saying for years.  There is a LOT of this kind of testimony.  If you are interested in looking at this issue, you don’t have to rely on the videos by themselves.  This post is just about one other source of corroboration. There are others. But to be open minded about this you would have to at least believe that it was possible that as a nation we have been defending the indefensible.

Read more about former abortionists here.  It seems like one of the most powerful tools for changing their minds was exposure to abortion itself.

Here is a page with links to videos with former abortion providers telling their stories.