Neanderthal Hoax Exposed

image A sensational archaeological hoax has been exposed in Germany. It's been revealed that Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten, a professor at a University in Frankfurt, has been systematically lying about the ages of skulls he found, claiming that they were far older than they actually were. In one instance he said that a skull was 21,300-years-old, although it was only 1300-years-old. As the Guardian reports:

"Anthropology is going to have to completely revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago," said Thomas Terberger, the archaeologist who discovered the hoax. "Prof Protsch's work appeared to prove that anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals had co-existed, and perhaps even had children together. This now appears to be rubbish."

Apparently Prof. Protsch began his career as a forger when he returned from studying in America decades ago and discovered that he was unable to work a carbon-dating machine. So he just started making up the ages of things.


Posted on Sun Feb 20, 2005


The May/June 2005 issue of Archaeology has a column on this. I am going to quote two paragraphs because I think they are interesting.

Chris Stringer, head of the Human Origins Department at London's Natural History Museum, was misquoted in one British paper as saying Hahnhofersand was significant in establishing the Neanderthal presence in northern Europ, and that without it scientists would have to "rewrite prehistory." Hahnhofersand was never even considered Neanderthal Stringer tells ARCHAEOLOGY. The redating of the remains has a "negligible" impact on scholorship, he adds.

The situation left many anthropologists scratching their heads. Binshof-Speyer Woman? Who was that? Despite media reports to the contrary, the fossils were actually of little significance on the paleoanthropological playing field. Hahnofersand made a bit of a splash in the 1980s when some scholars identified in it both Neanderthal and modern human characteristics, but it was always considered conterversial. "The three related specimens were not as pivital as some reports imply," agrees Martin Street, who sees a bigger issues at hand. "Clearly, it would be ideal if the age of a whole range of other alleged Pleistocene hominid fossils could be confirmed by absolute methods (such as carbon-14 dating), but it remains to be seen whether this lesson will be learned by the anthropological community."

Maybe journalists need to be trained better so that they actually know what they are talking about when they report on science?
Posted by Christopher Cole  in  Tucson, AZ  on  Fri Apr 29, 2005  at  02:05 PM
Actually Charbdis, its interesting you bring up the subject of proof, because I would like to ask a favour of you, to take a look at the bullshit and put up a forum to see if there are any people who have been conned by it, please put a forum up about it, I am really curious to see if anyone has any info on it etc.
Posted by Henkle  on  Wed Apr 05, 2006  at  07:49 PM
The Ice is Melting, Stop Drilling for Oil, We're Apes all on big Liberal Bullshit Hoax !
Posted by Rubberneck  on  Wed Nov 15, 2006  at  05:30 PM
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

When a "Missing Link" is "found", it's considered sensational news, to be splashed all over *every* major newspaper and lauded on *every* TV news broadcast. When the, alleged missing link is later determined to be something other than *that*, the information is buried in the second or third section, on the next to last page.

If one has any doubts that this is true, please read 1. the Holy Bible; 2. "Evolution of a Creationist" by Dr. Jobe Martin; 3. "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael J. Behe; 4. the Holy Bible.
Posted by Robert L. Beach  on  Sat Mar 31, 2007  at  10:36 PM
Ya, I would like to say that I remember quite clearly the information contained in my high school biology text book. And these proven hoaxes are being taught as fact still to this day(via my little sisters text book, she is 14 and in the 10th grade). Why? If there is, in fact, an "overwhelming amount of evidence in favor of" why is it that said evidence isn't taught. Instead my little sister is being taught that embryos, regardless of species, at early stages in there development are the same. Even though it was found out that Ernst Heakle, the originator of this idea, faked the provided evidence. In fact Haekle was disbarred from the university he served on in the mid 1800s for his forgery. I would love to know if anyone has any examples of rock hard evidence for evolution. I also would like to say that unless you can make a cell evolve from chemicals( a cell will die with out all of the bio machines that it contains being present) then evolutionary theory falls apart. Thanks for your time God Bless!!!!
Posted by Andrew Hinson  on  Wed Feb 13, 2008  at  05:39 PM
smile smile smile smile smile smile smile smile smile smile smile

Hahahahahahahahaha... finally you evolutionists are starting to see the truth more clearly! It's just a matter of time before you see how false, unbelievable and stupid evolution is.

Evolution=> Evilution => it's an Evil illusion.
Posted by Cindy  in  America  on  Tue Apr 22, 2008  at  08:43 AM
That's right, it's so much more sensible to believe that some scary god in the sky created us out of love so he could torture us for his own plans. Yup.
Posted by Charybdis  in  Hell  on  Tue Apr 22, 2008  at  10:49 AM
If someone need to know from where the life start. He has to compare people fom indonisia, new calidonia and african people. Also, where there is more people in the world: in asia, europe or africa. the american indian people are also from asia. So stop searching in africa and go to asia where the life start 30000 years ago.
Posted by truth  in  canada  on  Fri Mar 27, 2009  at  07:09 PM

While I respect that you have opinions of your own, I would ask that you tone down the arrogance and hate. If you whole-heartedly believe in Evolution, fantastic. I'm glad you've found something to put your faith in. But I don't appreciate being referred to as a 'cretin' simply because I interrupt data in a different way.

You are most certainly entitled to any opinion you desire. Just as I am. Just as the embarrassing elements of BOTH our world-views are. I, for one, am embarrassed by the people that will read the above article and use it as evidence to proclaim evolution bogus - for certain - and go and tell their friends.

I am a Christian and a Creationist, but I hardly see one small article speaking on a man lying to save his reputation as proof of any theory, of any world-view. People lie. I cannot count the number of times I have sat in church and heard a pastor misquote scripture, manipulate passages and deliberately take things out of context to prove his own 'theories' on theology. That doesn't make it all bogus. It means one individual doesn't get it, or has an ulterior motive. Shocking, I know, that Humans would manipulate something so many hold dear for their own gains.

'Science' is no different. It is open to interpretation. Point of view and perspective taint results as often as Human error. Your specific world-view, your specific ideas on why and how we are here will alter what you see. Where Evolutionist's see the work of random mutation and chance, a Creationist will see a guiding hand. But intrinsic to Science is an open-mind. I am NOT a scientist - despite my love for all things science - because I am NOT as open-minded as is needed. I do interpret things from a Judeo-Christian perspective. I admit this because there really is no point to hiding it, to arguing it.

My point is that men and women use the title 'Scientist' as a way of shutting others up; they declare themselves men and women of 'Science' and therefore unbiased. They claim they see only facts and data and extrapolate theories from them. This is not true. They are Evolutionists, Creationists or Other first, and Scientists last. We all interpret data. We all make 'educated guesses' based on what we see, hear, smell, taste and feel. Not all of our ideas are correct. What I am asking of you is to have an open mind and a little understanding. We do not all share the same beliefs, or 'theories', or whatever term you wish to place there. But we all do want something more, some explanation for how, and why, and what, and when. Rather than shut ourselves and our minds, rather than react with hate or contempt or any negative, non-constructive comments or thoughts, we should be striving to learn from one another. Many of the 'greats' of Science had a belief in a being, a 'god' that had a hand in our creation. It did not hamper their ability to dream or theorize. Hate, arrogance and contempt will.
Posted by Goggles  on  Sat Sep 19, 2009  at  01:02 PM
Obviously, the fraud and deception rampant in evoutionary, so-called "science" community extends beyond just one man! Do you remember "Nebraska Man"? An entire humanoid species was built around one fossilized tooth that later on was found to fit perfectly into the fossilized jawbone of a wild pig!
Add this to Piltdown Man and "Piltdown Chicken" and you'll see that evolutionists are constantly distorting and exaggerating findings and facts to desperately try to "prove" their Theory of Evolution, despite the many missing links which should abound in both living and fossil form if evolution were indeed more than just a theory!

If God is omnipotent enough to create the universe and all of its contents, surely he didn't need to take any long period of time to do so! His Word states that He created each creature after its own kind and commanded them to go forth and multiply - that's good enough for me!
Posted by Robert L. Beach  in  Ohio, USA  on  Sun Sep 20, 2009  at  07:06 AM
It's interesting that one of the founders of the piltdown man (arguably the greatest hoax of its kind) was a christian priest. He also found the peking man and supported the discovery of java man (both are now under scientific scrutiny).
Posted by kitabogo  in  Indonesia  on  Fri Jul 13, 2012  at  08:31 PM
Comments: Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
Commenting is no longer available in this channel entry.