Rosen – Theatrical Actor – Is CEO For CTV21, Cable Advisory Council Newton

The ability of citizen journalists to dig up information makes me very proud to know we won’t give up until we get the truth about Sandy Hook and other false flag events.  Now, we are getting more proof about the actors who are pulling off the biggest lie in American history to wit they want to ban our guns to keep this from happening again…. Again HELL… it didn’t happen as far as I can tell in the first place.  Watch this video.  There are others as well that show the incredible lack of real emotion showing on these parents faces whose children were supposedly just killed.

I can tell you right now that if my children were just killed, I would not be a fit sight on any television and I wouldn’t give a damn about my clothes or hair. I would be wailing and crying at the very mention of my child.  This lie makes me sick and angry.  It’s time we call them out on their bullshit.

Evolutionary Fraud – Scientific Subversion of Truth

I came across this article tonight and it should astound you as to the audacity of those in the science community who perpetuate the myth of evolution.  You might be one of those who believes in it, and think you have sound science behind you, but this article clearly shows that the major discoveries used to indoctrinate you and other generations were done by frauds!  Don’t be angry with me for sharing it, but rather be angry at the lie which has been used so successfully to brainwash children and drive them away from their faith in God and the creation accounts held therein.  That is the purpose of this deception my friends. It’s been used to justify Eugenics as a scientific field.  If I were a black person I would be highly pissed off with this crack science.  Many bigoted white people believe blacks are less evolved, and you can even hear them say, “Just look at them, they look like apes”!  My God, how insulting could one get?  God made the races and was very happy with each one.  The bible clearly says, he made some for fishing and some for hunting but he looked around and saw no man to till the ground and then he made “Eth ha Adam” or “The man Adam” to till the ground.

So, let’s take a look at the 9 frauds and see how these liars have deceived the world.

Evolution frauds

Why are there evolution frauds.

In 1859, in his book Origin of the Species, Charles Darwin said: “Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations,(why) do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?”. This is from chapter six entitled Difficulties on the Theory. Scientists who believe evolution have been searching for transitional forms ever since but they have been not found. Therefore, fraudulent fossils have been made and presented as transitional forms.

See 9 frauds of evolution below.

Earnst Haeckels evolution embryo fraud.

Evolution fraud Haeckels drawings
Evolution fraud. Haeckels drawings are still printed in some of todays school science text books with full knowledge that they are wrong.

One of the most popular and familiar pieces of evidence used to bolster the theory of evolution – reproduced for decades in most high school and college biology textbooks – is fraudulent, and has been known to be fraudulent for nearly 100 years.

Most people have seen those drawings of human embryos next to developing animal embryos, and they look virtually indistinguishable. (The Haeckel embryo sequence shown purported to show – left to right – a hog, calf, rabbit and human).This has long been said to demonstrate that humans share a common ancestry with these animals and thus prove the theory of evolution.

These pictures were designed by German zoologist Ernst Haeckel. What few people know – and one of many surprises in the evolution debate is that they were fakes. At Jena, the university where he taught, Haeckel was charged with fraud by five professors and convicted by a university court. His deceit was exposed in “Haeckel’s Frauds and Forgeries,” a 1915 book by J. Assmuth and Ernest R. Hull, who quoted 19 leading authorities of the day.

Ernst Haec


  • Rutimeyer said in 1868,

“Haeckel claims these works to be both easy for the scientific layman to follow, and scientific and scholarly. No one will quarrel with the first evaluation of the author, but the second quality is not one that he seriously can claim. These are works, clothed in medieval formalistic garb. There is considerable manufacturing of scientific evidence perpetrated. Yet the author has been very careful not to let the reader become aware of this state of affairs.” (Referate, L. Rutimeyer, in Archiv fur Anthropologie, 1868). [Notes: In 1868, L. Rutimeyer wrote an article, entitled “Referate,” which appeared on pages 301-302 of the Archiv fur Anthropologie (Archives of Anthropology). In that article, Rutimeyer, professor of zoology and comparative anatomy, at the University of Basel, reviewed two of Haeckel’s books, Natural History of Creation (Naturliche Schopfungsgeschichte), and his Uber die Enstehung and den Stammbaum des Menschengeschlechts, both of which had been newly published the same year that Rutimeyer’s review was published: 1868. Rutimeyer the fraudulent woodcuts. For example, the dog embryo and human embryo, shown on page 240 of Haeckel’s book, are completely identical. Haeckel maintained that he faithfully copied the dog embryo from Bischoff (4th week). Rutimeyer then reprinted the original drawing made by Bischoff of the dog embryo at 4 weeks, and the original of human embryo at 4 weeks made by Haeckel. The originals were very much different! Then Rutimeyer notes that, elsewhere in Haeckel’s book, that same woodcut is used to portray a dog, a chicken, and a tortoise! Rutimeyer was a well-known German scientist living at that time. He regularly had articles in each yearly volume of Archiv fur Anthropologie, yet his book review was never translated into English nor published in Britain or America!]

Yet, despite Haeckel’s fraud conviction and early exposure, Western educators continued using the pictures for decades as proof of the theory of evolution.

The matter was settled with finality by Dr. Michael Richardson, an embryologist at St. George’s Medical School in London. He found there was no record that anyone ever actually checked Haeckel’s claims by systematically comparing human and other fetuses during development. So Richardson assembled a scientific team that did just that – photographing the growing embryos of 39 different species.

In a 1997 interview in The Times of London, Dr. Richardson stated: “This is one of the worst cases of scientific fraud. It’s shocking to find that somebody one thought was a great scientist was deliberately misleading. It makes me angry. … What he [Haeckel] did was to take a human embryo and copy it, pretending that the salamander and the pig and all the others looked the same at the same stage of development. They don’t. … These are fakes.”

Today – believe it or not – Haeckel’s drawings still appear in many high school and college textbooks. Among them are “Evolutionary Biology” by Douglas J. Futuyma (Third Edition, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 1998), and also the bedrock text, “Molecular Biology of the Cell” (third edition), whose authors include biochemist Dr. Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences.

Haeckel’s fraudulent drawings are just one of evolution’s pillars now under spectacular scientific assault. There are many others.

Piltdown man, deliberate evolution fraud.

Completley fabricated fraud showing the willingness of evolutionists to swollow anything that seems to support their pet theory.

Completley fabricated fraud showing the willingness of evolutionists to swollow anything that seems to support their pet theory.

Britain’s Greatest Hoax.  That was the title of the ‘Timewatch’ investigation of the Piltdown Man fraud, shown on BBC2 television recently.1 Viewers were presented with a great British ‘whodunnit’ that tried to identify those who made monkeys out of the scientists of the day.

The history of the discovery of the earliest Englishman (as Piltdown Man was so often called) is fairly common knowledge.  A laborer was supposedly digging in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in Sussex in southern England when he found a piece of bone.  He passed it to the local amateur archaeologist of the district, Charles Dawson, who verified its antiquity and pronounced that it was part of a skull which was possibly human.  Dawson began to search for the rest of the skull and, in 1912, a jawbone was discovered.  Sir Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum verified that the skull had human features and the jaw was ape-like.  The fossils became known as Piltdown Man and were called Eoanthropus dawsoni which means ‘Dawson’s Dawn Man’.  In 1915, another Dawn Man was found a couple of miles away from the site of the first find.  Fossil remains of animals that lived with Piltdown Man, together with the tools that he used, were also found at the two sites.  At last, here was ‘proof’ that apes had evolved into humans in England.

Almost forty years later, in 1953, Piltdown Man was exposed as a forgery, mainly through the work of Dr Kenneth Oakley.  He showed that the skull was from a modern human and that the jawbone and teeth were from an orangutan.  The teeth had been filed down to make them look human.  The bones and teeth had been chemically treated (and sometimes even painted) to give them the appearance of being ancient. In addition, it was also shown that none of the finds associated with Piltdown Man had been originally buried in the gravel that had been deposited at Piltdown.  The Piltdown Man fraud was a great embarrassment to the UK scientific community and questions about it were even asked in the House of Parliament.At the time that the discovery of Piltdown Man was announced, it was believed that the remains of the Neanderthals that had been found in Germany were ape-men and it was believed that the cave paintings that had been found in France had been painted by ape-men.  The British evolutionists, however, had other ideas.  They believed that apes had evolved into humans in the UK—preferably in England.  Piltdown Man was ‘proof’ that the first ape-man lived in the garden of England!  The desire to find the earliest Englishman had blinded the scientists of the day, so they uncritically accepted Piltdown Man as being genuine.  No scientist is a seeker after truth in some sort of idealized neutral fashion—in this case, they interpreted their finds within their (evolutionary) world view, fashioned by parochial prejudice.Some have suggested Sir Arthur Smith Woodward was the fraudster.  He was without doubt Piltdown Man’s greatest advocate.  Had he carried out some basic scientific tests and a more detailed examination of the finds, he would have realized that he was dealing with a hoax.  He retired from the British Museum in 1924 and spent the next 20 years, until his death in 1944, digging at the Piltdown Man site in Piltdown searching for more finds.  He did not find any.  Surely if he was the perpetrator of this hoax, he would not have wasted the last 20 years of his life in what he would have known to be a futile search.It would appear that the best candidate for being the perpetrator of the Piltdown Man fraud is none other than Charles Dawson.  He was always vague about the events surrounding the initial discovery and after he died in 1916, it was realized that all the historical artifacts that he had supposedly found and that were on display in Hastings Museum were forgeries.  However, it appears that Martin Hinton of the British Museum suspected that Piltdown Man was a hoax.  Hinton, himself, was one who enjoyed playing hoaxes and jokes on others.  In 1915, Dawson and Woodward found a curious bone implement under a hedge at Piltdown.  This implement had all the hallmarks of a Hinton joke for it looked like a cricket bat—presumably the first Englishman loved his game of cricket!  It is quite likely that Hinton fashioned this implement and placed it at the site in the hope that it would be found and that as a result, Dawson would know that someone knew that Piltdown Man was a forgery.  Unfortunately, this plan backfired and a description of this implement was written up and published!

Evolutionists often express irritation when Piltdown Man and other fakes are raised by their opponents.  A common attempt to put a ‘positive spin’ on the whole affair is to portray it as a ‘plus’ for science, demonstrating its allegedly ‘self-correcting nature’.  After all, we are told, it was evolutionary scientists themselves who discovered the fraud.  However, the issue is not the hoax as such; the scandal of Piltdown is that such an amateurish, clumsy and obvious fraud (even showing filemarks on the teeth) went undetected for over 40 years.  Generations were indoctrinated into the ‘fact of evolution’ via Piltdown gracing countless textbooks and encyclopedias.Many scientists, including people writing doctoral theses, had access to the bones, and they were laboriously studied.  No-one saw the hoax at the time, but afterwards, it all seemed obvious; things like the file marks suddenly sprang into view.  It was clear that even highly qualified scientists had simply seen what they were looking for and ignored that which did not fit their preconception.  It is also no surprise that the hoax was not uncovered until after other ‘plausible candidates’ for man’s evolutionary ancestry were on the horizon.

(ref, Dr A J Monty White. CEO AiG UK)

Nebraska Man. False evolutionary model made from a pigs tooth. The pig was still alive too.

This drawing of nebraska man was formed in the minds of evolutionists from a pig tooth.

This drawing of nebraska man was formed in the minds of evolutionists from a pig tooth.

Like many supposed predecessors to our  current human form. Nebraska man was formed form the minimalist of bones. A single tooth was all it took for evolutionists to come up with the drawing you see above.

In 1922 Paleontologist Harald Cook found a single tooth in Western Nebraska USA in Pliocene deposits that were alleged to be 6 million years old. To find a “Missing link” in the USA is a big thing for a start as most humanoids were thought to be from Africa. Another example of “we will take any proof of evolution”.  This Nebraska man tooth was the reason that evolution started to be taught in schools. Before Nebraska man evolution had a hard time getting taught in schools but such was the fanfare of Nebraska man that evolution became the excepted norm. Even so this embarrassing oversight due to the rabidness  of evolutionists to “prove” their theory, only lasted a few years before it was found out as a “DUMB” mistake. The pig it belonged too is a species of pig called “prosthennops serus”, this pig was found still alive in Paraguay in 1972.

Java Man is False!

Java man was created from this bone fragment.

Java man was created from this bone fragment.

The human fossil commonly known as Java Man was found in 1891 by Eugene Dubois who was the first person to deliberately search for human ancestors. Dubois was a former student of Earnst haeckel who became intent on discovering the missing link his mentor believed had evolved somewhere in Africa or East Asia, and which Haeckel had already named without any physical evidence – Pithecanthropus alalus (man without speech). To aid in his investigations, Dubois signed up as a doctor with the Dutch medical corps in the Dutch East Indies with the intention of hunting for fossils during his spare time.

After years of excavations with the assistance of forced laborers, they dug up a tooth and skullcap on the banks of the Solo River on Java island (an island of Indonesia). The skullcap was ape-like having a low forehead and large eyebrow ridges. The following year and about forty feet away, the workmen uncovered a thigh bone that was clearly human. Due to the close proximity of the find, Dubois assumed they belonged to the same creature. Dubois then named the find Pithecanthropus erectus (erect ape-man).

After returning to Europe in 1895, Dubois went on a lecture circuit and displayed his fossils to the International Congress of Zoology. His discovery received a lukewarm reception, causing him to became secretive, and paranoid, refusing to let anyone else examine the bones. Rudolph Virchow, who had been Haeckel’s professor and is considered the father of modern pathology remarked: “In my opinion this creature was an animal, a giant gibbon, in fact. The thigh bone has not the slightest connection with the skull.”

A later team of German scientists traveled to Java in 1907 to unearth more clues on human ancestry. They hired 75 workers and sent 43 crates of fossil material back to Germany, but no evidence of Pithecanthropus could be found. Instead the German scientists found modern flora and fauna in the strata where Dubois had found his Pithecanthropus. Dr. E. Carthaus, a geologist on the expedition concluded that Pithecanthropus was a modern human.

Further suspicions regarding the credibility of Dubois involve two other skullcaps that Dubois expedition had uncovered which were clearly human. He apparently failed to display the human skullcaps when parading his Pithecanthropus. In fact, he kept the skulls hidden under the floorboards of his house for thirty years, then finally made them known in the 1920s.(ref,

Neanderthal man, another deliberate fraud by evolutionist scientists.

Neanderthal fraud man.

Neanderthal fraud man.

“If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.” Most of us have heard this piece of advice on more than one occasion. Yet, this was exactly the case with a famous Neanderthal fossil discovered in a peat bog near Hamburg, Germany. Prior to its discovery, the evolutionary timeline of ape-like creatures remained extremely “fuzzy” as it approached modern man. There simply were not any fossils that shed light on this period. But a single discovery dated by Professor Reiner Protsch cleared up the picture. Many years ago, he was invited to date the famous skull, which he later pronounced to be the vital missing link between Neanderthals and modern humans. He dated the skull at 36,000 years old, allowing it to fall neatly into the evolutionists’ timeline between Neanderthals and modern man. Finally, thanks to Protsch, the gap had been filled. All the pieces were in place.

For evolutionists, it was too good to be true. And indeed, it was. On February 18, 2005, Protsch was forced to retire in disgrace after a Frankfurt University panel ruled he had “fabricated data and plagiarized the work of his colleagues” (see “Anthropologist Resigns in ‘Dating Disaster,’ ” 2005). Once believed to be a world-renowned expert on carbon dating, Protsch’s entire professional career is now being questioned. The university noted: “The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years” (“Anthropologist Resigns…”).

Protsch’s work first attracted suspicion when scientists at Oxford wanted to double-check the authenticity of his dates and verify the ages of many previously reported fossils using modern techniques. Oxford officials insist that this “dating disaster” was discovered during a routine examination, and was not an attempt to discredit Professor Protsch. The fossils he had dated were just in a long line of others that were being rechecked. According to Thomas Terberger, the archaeologist who discovered the hoax: “[A]nthropology is going to have to completely revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago” (as quoted in Harding, 2005). He continued: “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” (emp. added).

But the Neanderthal skull was not the only forgery Oxford discovered. Protsch also had paraded “Binshof-Speyer” woman before the public, stating that she was 21,300 years old. Yet the new Oxford date puts this woman living at 1,300 B.C. Protsch also claimed that “Paderborn-Sande Man” walked the Earth 27,400 B.C., and yet the corrected figure reveals that he died only a couple hundred years ago—in A.D. 1750! Futhermore, Protsch also is being investigated for a scandal in which he allegedly tried to sell 280 chimpanzee skulls to individuals in the United States for $70,000.

Evolutionists are quick to point out that this is how science works—that it is self-correcting. And there is a great deal of truth to that statement. However, one must question how such scientists can continue to support evolution being taught as “fact,” knowing that much of what we believe to be true today will have to be “self-corrected” in the future. Why not allow students to “examine the controversy” and discuss possible problems with evolutionary theory? How many students did Professor Protsch affect with his forged information? Likely, that number is in the thousands. After all, his dates “looked good” and “fit the evolutionary timeline,” which meant textbooks would be quick to pick them up. Never mind that the material was a complete hoax.

According to the World Net Daily Web site, Rudolf Steinberg, Frankfurt University’s president, “apologized for the University’s failure to curb Protsch’s misconduct for decades. ‘A lot of people looked the other way,’ he said.” But what good does that apology do when it comes to unraveling the lie that was sold to the public for so many years? The article went on to report: “Chris Stringer, a Stone Age specialist and head of human origins at London’s Natural History Museum, said: ‘What was considered a major piece of evidence showing that the Neanderthals once lived in northern Europe has fallen by the wayside. We are having to rewrite prehistory’ ” (2005). How many times must we rewrite evolutionary history? Don’t students deserve better? Don’t we all deserve better?

Neandethal man, just a modern human with disease.

After discovering the first Neanderthal skullcap in 1856 in the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany, German anatomist Ruldolph Virchow said in essence that the fossil was the remains of a modern man afflicted with rickets and osteoporosis. In 1958, at the International Congress of Zoology, A.J.E. Cave stated that his examination of the famous Neanderthal skeleton established that it was simply an old man who had suffered from arthritis. Francis Ivanhoe authored an article that appeared in Nature titled “Was Virchow Right About Neanderthal?” (1970). Virchow had reported that the Neanderthal’s ape-like appearance was due to a condition known as rickets, which is a vitamin-D deficiency characterized by overproduction (and deficient calcification) of bone tissue. The disease causes skeletal deformities, enlargement of the liver and spleen, and generalized tenderness throughout the body. Dr. Cave noted that every Neanderthal child’s skull that had been studied up to that point in time apparently was affected by severe rickets. When rickets occurs in children, it commonly produces a large head due to late closure of the epiphysis and fontanels.

Even though Ivanhoe was an evolutionist, he nevertheless went on to note that the wide distribution of Neanderthal finds in various parts of the world explained the differences seen in bone configuration. The extreme variation in locations of these Neanderthal discoveries probably played a role in the diversity of the fossils assigned to the Neanderthal group. The differences likely were a result of different amounts of sunlight for a given area, which prevented or retarded vitamin D production (vitamin D is manufactured in the skin upon exposure to sunlight). In adults, a lack of vitamin D causes osteomalacia, a softening of the bones that often results in longer bones “bowing” (a condition reported in many Neanderthal fossils).

Scientists have debated long and hard concerning whether there exists any difference between Neanderthal specimens and modern humans. One of the world’s foremost authorities on the Neanderthals, Erik Trinkaus, concluded:

Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans (1978, 87[10]:58).


Harding, Luke (2005), “Another Day, Another ‘Science’ Fraud,” MedKB, [On-Line], URL:

“Anthropologist Resigns in ‘Dating Disaster’ ” (2005), World Net Daily, [On-line], URL:

Copyright © 2005 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved. Article by Brad Harrub PH.D.

Lucy the hominid. Evolutionists are clueless.

Lucy the ape was said to be our ancestor.

Lucy the ape was said to be our ancestor.

Lucy, a hominid ancester to modern man supposedly is really just an extinct species of ape. There is no evidence for or against but evolutionist and geologist Frank Brown of the university of Utah said this, “We’ve always assumed Lucy was our ancestor, and now we need to re-evaluate that idea,”

On this video below we see Dr David menton show how lucy has possibly been fraudelently modified to walk like a human. Its a very interesting video to watch and we can see from the original bones of Lucy that she was a knuckle walker.

As we can clearly see evolutionary scientists do not let science do the talking. Scientists today enter their field of expertise as already converted atheist evolutionists. Subscribing to a theory of faith, they then set out on a lifelong mission to prove their personal beliefs, even to the point of fraud rather than let science speak for itself. This video, im sure you agree shows this.

Orce Man.


Are we supposed to believe such confused scientists?

On May 14, 1984, the *Daily Telegraph, an Australian newspaper, carried the story of the latest hoax: “ASS TAKEN FOR MAN” was the headline.

A skull found in Spain and promoted as the oldest example of man in Eurasia, was later identified as that of a young donkey!

A three-day scientific symposium had been scheduled, so that the experts could examine and discuss the bone which had already been named, Orce Man, for the southern Spanish town near which it had been found. The French caused problems, however. Scientists from Paris showed that Orce Man was a skull fragment of a four-month-old donkey. The embarrassed Spanish officials sent out 500 letters canceling the symposium.

Archaeoraptor is a faked evolution example of a missing link.

Fake Dinosaur bird. Evolutionists are so quick to swollow fabrications such is the keenness to prove evolution.

Fake Dinosaur bird. Evolutionists are so quick to swallow fabrications such is the keenness to prove evolution.

by Owen D. Olbricht

The hoax was most likely an honest mistake not like the Piltdown man fraud of 1908 which combined recent skeletal remains with various animal parts. The name given the find in July 1997 was Archaeoraptor Liaoningenesis Sloan after Christopher Sloan, senior assistant editor of National Geographic, who wrote, “With arms of a primitive bird and tail of a dinosaur, this creature found in Liaoning Province, China, is a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds.” He confidently affirmed, “We can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently as we can say that humans are mammals” (“Feathers for T. Rex?” National Geographic, vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pages 98-107.

In the last article of the October, 2000, issue is the embarrassing admission that the Archaeoraptor fossil was a fraud, a combination of fossils. This all happened because of inadequate scientific consideration of evidence.

Lewis M. Simons, a veteran investigative reporter looked into the matter and described what went wrong (“Archaeoraptor Fossil Trail,” National Geographic, vol. 198, No. 4, October, 2000, pages 128-132).

A farmer digging in a shale pit in Xiasanjiazi, China, hacked out a slab containing “the fossilized bones of what seemed to be a bird, including a faint aura of feathers and a beak lined with tiny teeth” (page 128). “Continuing to dig, he uncovered another, smaller slab a couple of yards away. This one contained a tail, rigid and about the size of a crocheting needle, a skull, a foot, and some other parts” (loc.cit.).

The farmer took the two slabs home. “Using a home made paste, he glued the slab of the tail to the lower portion of the birdlike body. With counterslab pieces from the body itself–and possibly other scraps he had kept over time–he glued in missing legs and feet” (page 129). “The result was the missing link–the body of a primitive bird with teeth and the tail of a landbound little dinosaur, or dromaeosaur. In time the tail, and the question whether or not it belonged where it was stuck, would wag the dinosaur (loc.cit.).

The reason the fraud was not immediately discovered was that scientists who looked at it at first were busy with other projects, and assuming it was authentic, did not scrutinize it carefully. Stephen A. Czerkas, director of a nonprofit dinosaur museum raised $80,000 to buy it, never doubting it was authentic. He stated, “It’s a missing link between terrestrial dinosaurs and birds that could actually fly” (vol. 196, No. 5, page 99).

He showed it to the renowned Canadian scientist, Philip J. Currie, who accepted it as authentic without adequately examining the fossil, supposing it was real. He consulted with Christopher Sloan of National Geographic who wrote the story that the missing link between dinosaurs and birds had been found. A complete investigation of the fossil was not made because of a deadline to submit the story for publication.

Kevin Aulenback examined the fossil and wrote that it “is a composite specimen of at least 3 specimens.with a maximum.of five.separate specimens” (Vol. 198, No. 4, page 131). This should have been adequate evidence that it was a fraud; however, not until Xu Xing presented the results of his examination of the fossil was it finally admitted that it was a fraud. “`I am 100% sure..’ Xu wrote, `we have to admit that Archaeoraptor is a faked specimen’” (page 132).Finally it was conceded that “beyond all doubt that the tail belonged to the second fossil” (ref,

Horse evolution fraud

This evolution of the horse timeline is a fraud and was never based on any fact. It is still used in todays text books.

This evolution of the horse timeline is a fraud and was never based on any fact. It is still used in todays text books.

  1. In 1841, the earliest so-called “horse” fossil was discovered in clay around London. The scientist who unearthed it, Richard Owen, found a complete skull that looked like a fox’s head with multiple back-teeth as in hoofed animals. He called it Hyracotherium. He saw no connection between it and the modern-day horse.
  2. In 1874, another scientist, Kovalevsky, attempted to establish a link between this small fox-like creature, which he thought was 70 million years old, and the modern horse.
  3. In 1879, an American fossil expert, O. C. Marsh, and famous evolutionist Thomas Huxley, collaborated for a public lecture which Huxley gave in New York. Marsh produced a schematic diagram which attempted to show the so-called development of the front and back feet, the legs, and the teeth of the various stages of the horse. He published his evolutionary diagram in the American Journal of Science in 1879, and it found its way into many other publications and textbooks. The scheme hasn’t changed. It shows a beautiful gradational sequence in “the evolution” of the horse, unbroken by any abrupt changes. This is what we see in school textbooks.

The question is: “Is the scheme proposed by Huxley and Marsh true?”

The simple answer is “No”. While it is a clever arrangement of the fossils on an evolutionary assumption, even leading evolutionists such as George Gaylord Simpson backed away from it. He said it was misleading.

So what’s the difficulty for the horse with the theory of evolution?

  1. If it were true, you would expect to find the earliest horse fossils in the lowest rock strata. But you don’t. In fact, bones of the supposed “earliest” horses have been found at or near the surface. Sometimes they are found right next to modern horse fossils! O.C. Marsh commented on living horses with multiple toes, and said there were cases in the American Southwest where “both fore and hind feet may each have two extra digits fairly developed, and all of nearly equal size, thus corresponding to the feet of the extinct Protohippus”. In National Geographic (January 1981, p. 74), there is a picture of the foot of a so-called early horse, Pliohippus, and one of the modern Equus that were found at the same volcanic site in Nebraska. The writer says: “Dozens of hoofed species lived on the American plains.” Doesn’t this suggest two different species, rather than the evolutionary progression of one?
  2. There is no one site in the world where the evolutionary succession of the horse can be seen. Rather, the fossil fragments have been gathered from several continents on the assumption of evolutionary progress, and then used to support the assumption. This is circular reasoning, and does not qualify as objective science.
  3. The theory of horse evolution has very serious genetic problems to overcome. How do we explain the variations in the numbers of ribs and lumbar vertebrae within the imagined evolutionary progression? For example, the number of ribs in the supposedly “intermediate” stages of the horse varies from 15 to 19 and then finally settles at 18. The number of lumbar vertebrae also allegedly swings from six to eight and then returns to six again.
  4. Finally, when evolutionists assume that the horse has grown progressively in size over millions of years, what they forget is that modern horses vary enormously in size. The largest horse today is the Clydesdale; the smallest is the Fallabella, which stands at 17 inches (43 centimeters) tall. Both are members of the same species, and neither has evolved from the other.

Two horses. Photo copyrighted. Supplied by Eden Communications. My research has left me troubled. Why do science textbooks continue to use the horse as a prime example of evolution, when the whole schema is demonstrably false? Why do they continue to teach our kids something that is not scientific? Dr. Niles Eldredge, curator of the American Museum of Natural History, has said:

“I admit that an awful lot of that (imaginary stories) has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs (in the American Museum) is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable …”.

The horse series is often presented as proof of evolution. The number of toes in foreleg and hind leg supposedly decreased as the horse evolved, and the size supposedly increased from a small doglike horse to a large modern horse. Yet three-toed horses have been found with one-toed horses, showing they lived at the same time. And there are tiny living Fallabella horses only17 inches ( 43 centimeters) tall.


  1. O. C. Marsh, “Recent Polydactyle Horses”, American Journal of Science 43, 1892, pp. 339-354 – as quoted in Creation Research Society Quarterly correspondence, Vol. 30, December 1993, p. 125.
  2. Niles Eldredge, as quoted in: Luther D. Sunderland, Darwin’s Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, fourth edition (revised and expanded), Master Book Publishers, Santee (California),1988, p. 78.

Author: Peter Hastie. Copyright 1996

Serious Questions Arise About Sandy Hook

This is a great article to look for the truth regarding the Sandy Hook massacre.  This is the Hegelian Dialectic in action.  They want our guns. They want us scared, and they want to control us completely.  Who is they?  The ones pulling the strings of governments around the world.  James Perloff wrote a book titled, “The Shadows of Power” and he gave this talk about what that book is about.  If you watch this, then read the following article and ask yourself if anyone in power could have pulled off a false flag massacre whose goal is to take the last freedom we have that truly protects all the other freedoms and that is the right to keep and bear arms.  You see a right is NOT granted. It is a right, God given and one the government cannot restrict. That is like the right to breath.  The 2nd amendment is the force to protect all the other rights we have as free men and women.


Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting

Serious Questions Arise Concerning the True Nature of the Events

On Friday, December 14th, 2012, an event of horrific proportions took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut:  More than two dozen people were reported to have been slain by a lone gunman inside of Sandy Hook Elementary School.  Twenty of the victims are reported to have been children.  The suspected shooter is said to be 20-year-old Adam Lanza, a shy and reclusive young man whom the media is reporting suffered from obsessive compulsive disorder, personality disorder as well as Asperger’s Syndrome (autism).  Adam was said to have been armed with as many as five weapons as well as a bullet-proof vest at the time when the murders took place.  Reports state that he was also dressed in camouflage/black battle fatigues.  Reports have also surfaced from local police in which we are told that after opening fire and killing dozens of people, Adam Lanza then turned one of those guns on himself in an apparent murder/suicide.
In the wake of this event, some very confusing details have surfaced in regards to the mainstream media’s reports concerning the true nature of the events which took place inside the school.  The purpose of this write-up is merely to ask some very basic questions, as the media reports which have surfaced, when put together, seem to paint a very confusing picture.
This article is in NO WAY meant to confirm nor deny any of the reports coming forward.  It is merely meant as a forum for asking some deeper questions.  The scope of this tragedy is immeasurable, and we must all mourn deeply for the deaths of these innocent victims.

Please click HERE to watch a video showing the full speech given on Saturday, December 15th, 2012 by Robbie Parker, father of Emilie Parker, a victim in the Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings.

Please click HERE to watch the full Press Conference given by Dr. H. Wayne Carver, chief medical examiner assigned to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings.

School Principal speaks to reporters before being killed

In a report posted in The Newtown Bee, the town’s local newspaper, the following statement is made:

“Sandy Hook School Principal Dawn Hochsprung told the Bee that a masked man entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots-more than she could count-that went on and on.”

This statement raises a very serious question:  How could the school principal, who is reported to have been one of those killed inside the school, have spoken to reporters before being murdered?  All mainstream media outlets report that the killings happened over a matter of minutes, so how could the principal have possibly made contact with reporters?
This report was taken down from The Newtown Bee’s official website, but a screen of it is shown here:

DHS and FEMA run joint emergency preparedness drills at the Sandy Hook Fire Department in fall of 2010

In a rather coincidental turn of events, it appears that both the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) conducted a joint emergency preparedness exercise on September 22nd of 2010 in the town of Sandy Hook, Connecticut.  This was conducted under the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP).  The operation was conducted out of the Sandy Hook Fire Department, which is located in the immediate vicinity of the Sandy Hook Elementary school, just across the road.  This begs the question:  Is it pure coincidence that two major federal agencies conducted a joint emergency preparedness exercise two years and four months prior to a major event happening at the school?

Official website link to the training course at Sandy HookHERE
Link to the official DHS HSEEP website HERE
Link to FEMA’s Exercise Evaluation Guides (EEG), which are tied into the HSEEP training course HERE

Media reports on multiple suspects apprehended at the scene

The vast majority of mainstream media reports have stated that Adam Lanza acted alone in committing this tragedy.

Initial Press Statement from Governor’s office and the State Police HERE

Article in the Examiner HERE

However, an eyewitness live on the scene is interviewed and claims that a second suspect was apprehended and placed into a police car.  That footage is HERE.  The exchange between the eyewitness and the reporter was as follows:


“I saw him walk a guy earlier with handcuffs, and he walked by us and said he didn’t do it.



“It was a grown man?”


“A grown man, yeah.  He’s sittin’ in the front of the police car over there now.”


“He didn’t have a gun?”


No, I didn’t see any gun, just had him handcuffed, and he walked by us and looked into parents eyes and said, “I didn’t do it.”


“How was he dressed?”


“Camo pants with a dark jacket.”

Several mainstream sources have also reported that a second suspect was apprehended at the scene.

“A second man wearing camouflage trousers was seen being handcuffed. One witness described him shouting: “I didn’t do it.”

–from the UK Telegraph HERE
To read the rest of the article click HERE.

A Potential Deadly Aurora Movie Massacre In Texas Is Prevented By Concealed Carry Citizen: Police Do NOT Owe A Duty To Protect!

I would have reblogged this, but they did not have a button to do so. Great blog to visit !


An armed citizen at the San Antonio Mayan 14 Movie Theater Sunday, shot & disarmed a lone gunman who had opened fire 20 rounds inside the theater, according to reports.

This shooting comes just days after a deadly rampage at a school in Connecticut and sparks memories of the the mass slaying at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo.

A San Antonio shooting left two wounded after a gunman opened fire at a Texas move theater, sending hundreds of people running in an attack reminiscent of the Aurora, Colo. movie theater shooting earlier this year.

The gunman who perpetrated the San Antonio shooting, whose name has not been released, was taken into custody after being wounded by an armed citizen.

Witnesses said the San Antonio shooter fired numerous shots inside and outside of the Santikos Mayan Palace 14 theater at approximately 9:45 p.m. last night. The San Antonio movie theater complex was evacuated and sealed off for several hours.

It’s not clear what led to the shooting, but police said the San Antonio shooting began when the gunman fired shots inside a nearby restaurant and carried on into the theater. The gunman shot a male in the parking lot and entered the theater where he opened fire, but did not hit anyone. The San Antonio shooter also opened fire on a police car.

“He was shooting at a marked unit,” Bexar County Sheriff’s spokesman Louis Antu told CBS News. “He knows he was shooting at an officer, so that’s (an) automatic (charge of) attempted capital murder.”

The suspect was taken to the hospital and was not immediately charged. The extent of the injuries of the two who were injured was not known, but police said they did not sustain life-threatening injuries.

The shooting comes just days after Adam Lanza killed 27 at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown Conn., and is the second movie theater shooting this year. The numerous shootings has many people on edge.

“It brings back memories of the other theater shooting, and the elementary school shooting,” Cassandra Castillo, whose son works in the theater, told KENS. “You only think the worst.”




In the wake of a monstrous crime like a madman’s mass murder of defenseless women and children at the Newtown, Conn., elementary school, the nation’s attention is riveted on what could have been done to prevent such a massacre.Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.Landes and Lott examined many of the very policies being proposed right now in response to the Connecticut massacre: waiting periods and background checks for guns, the death penalty and increased penalties for committing a crime with a gun.None of these policies had any effect on the frequency of, or carnage from, multiple-victim shootings. (I note that they did not look at reforming our lax mental health laws, presumably because the ACLU is working to keep dangerous nuts on the street in all 50 states.)

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

Their study controlled for age, sex, race, unemployment, retirement, poverty rates, state population, murder arrest rates, violent crime rates, and on and on.

The effect of concealed-carry laws in deterring mass public shootings was even greater than the impact of such laws on the murder rate generally.

Someone planning to commit a single murder in a concealed-carry state only has to weigh the odds of one person being armed. But a criminal planning to commit murder in a public place has to worry that anyone in the entire area might have a gun.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut starting gunning down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid.If the deterrent effect of concealed-carry laws seems surprising to you, that’s because the media hide stories of armed citizens stopping mass shooters. At the Portland shooting, for example, no explanation was given for the amazing fact that the assailant managed to kill only two people in the mall during the busy Christmas season.It turns out, concealed-carry-holder Nick Meli hadn’t noticed that the mall was a gun-free zone. He pointed his (otherwise legal) gun at the shooter as he paused to reload, and the next shot was the attempted mass murderer killing himself. (Meli aimed, but didn’t shoot, because there were bystanders behind the shooter.)

In a nonsense “study” going around the Internet right now, Mother Jones magazine claims to have produced its own study of all public shootings in the last 30 years and concludes: “In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun.”

This will come as a shock to people who know something about the subject.

The magazine reaches its conclusion by simply excluding all cases where an armed civilian stopped the shooter: They looked only at public shootings where four or more people were killed, i.e., the ones where the shooter wasn’t stopped.

If we care about reducing the number of people killed in mass shootings, shouldn’t we pay particular attention to the cases where the aspiring mass murderer was prevented from getting off more than a couple rounds?

It would be like testing the effectiveness of weed killers, but refusing to consider any cases where the weeds died.

In addition to the Portland mall case, here are a few more examples excluded by the Mother Jones’ methodology:

– Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.

– Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead: Two. (I’m excluding the shooters’ deaths in these examples.)

Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead: Three.

– Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates — as well as the “trained campus supervisor”; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead: Two.

– Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman’s head, ending the murder spree. Total dead: Two.

– Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead: One.

By contrast, the shootings in gun-free zones invariably result in far higher casualty figures — Sikh temple, Oak Creek, Wis. (six dead); Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va. (32 dead); Columbine High School, Columbine, Colo. (12 dead); Amish school, Lancaster County, Pa. (five little girls killed); public school, Craighead County, Ark. (five killed, including four little girls).

All these took place in gun-free zones, resulting in lots of people getting killed — and thereby warranting inclusion in the Mother Jones study.

If what we care about is saving the lives of innocent human beings by reducing the number of mass public shootings and the deaths they cause, only one policy has ever been shown to work: concealed-carry laws. On the other hand, if what we care about is self-indulgent grandstanding, and to hell with dozens of innocent children being murdered in cold blood, try the other policies.

Related articles

American Gun Owners to be Fingerprinted and Registered: Feinstein Announces Nightmare Plan

It did not take them long to show exactly what they are planning.  The finger is being pointed squarely at the American gun owner now, and just as Hitler began to his take-over of Germany with gun registration we are seeing the same things happening in America.  First you register, then you have to return for a new registration and they confiscate the weapons.  This is not 1930 or Germany.  American’s are a law abiding and sensible people, but we know history enough and we will not give up our guns easily and the government knows this.

Our only real defense is not going out and having a shoot out at the OK Coral, but simply not complying.  They cannot arrest and jail hundreds let alone millions, and it’s as simple as that.  There is no need to get all upset. Just don’t comply and what can they really do?  Clog the system and refuse to cooperate.  Imagine a good ol’ sit-in of sorts.  Just don’t allow anymore of these unlawful illegal searches at airports, roadside police stops, or demands to see your papers by da fuhrer.


Photo: Michael Saechang.

California Democrat Dianne Feinstein will introduce legislation in January calling for the fingerprinting and registering of all gun owners in the United States.

On her Senate web page, Feinstein states her proposed legislation will add fingerprinting and photo identification to the National Firearms Act.

A firearms seller must currently submit Form 4473 to the government containing the name, address, driver license information, NICS background check transaction number, serial number and model of the firearm, and a short federal affidavit stating that the purchaser is eligible to purchase firearms under federal law. Feinstein’s bill will add a substantial layer of bureaucracy to the existing regulations.

The effort to expand firearms registration will include weapons grandfathered prior to the enactment of Feinstein’s proposed legislation. In other words, all gun owners will be required to register their constitutionally guaranteed firearms with a federal government inimical to the Second Amendment.

Feinstein’s registration process will likely surpass New York City’s handgun permit process, which is a bureaucratic nightmare. In addition to non-refundable fees totaling over $500, the permit process demands two recent color photos, a birth certificate, proof of citizenship and residence, a blizzard of affidavits, and other red-tape hurdles. Applications are routinely denied for spurious reasons, including non-violent misdemeanors and depression.

As Dean Weingarten notes, gun registration is de facto gun confiscation. Following mandatory gun registration, the government “will know who has legal possession of each firearm. They will know where the firearm is stored. When physical possession of the gun is desired, they can order you to turn it in. This has happened repeatedly,” most notably in Nazi Germany, Red China and Soviet Russia.

More recently, it has occurred in Kosovo, Great Britain, Australia, New York, and California. If Feinstein has her way next month, it will happen across America.

Democrats and their Republican co-conspirators are going all out to ban firearms. Feinstein’s bill will ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of 120 specifically-named firearms, including semiautomatic rifles, handguns, and shotguns that can accept detachable and fixed magazines and have “one military characteristic.”

In addition, Feinstein’s bill will outlaw flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, thumbhole stocks and bullet buttons on firearms.

Make no mistake about it. Obama and his anti-Second Amendment allies in Congress are coming for your guns. If they have their way, the only legal firearms in America will be rifles with 10 round magazines and single shot and bolt-action rifles – and those firearms will be registered with the government and may be confiscated at any moment.


Sen. Feinstein’s ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Really Handgun Ban

Sen. Feinstein’s ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Really Handgun Ban

by AWR Hawkins 27 Dec 2012

After all the Democrats’ emphasis the dangers of so-called “assault weapons,” the details of Senator Dianne Feinstein’s pending assault weapons ban show that her real goal is to ban handguns.

That’s right, after all the criticism of the AR-15 and the holier-than-thou speeches about how no one needs a military-style rifle with a 30-round magazine the details of the ban betray a gun grab that includes semi-automatic pistols that use “a detachable magazine” and have “one military characteristic.”

This can only mean that the most popular handguns in the world for both civilian and military use are being targeted. These would include Glocks, Sig Sauers, Smith & Wesson M&Ps, H&K, and Colt, yet would by no means be limited to these handguns alone.

Ironically, I was just talking to a friend this morning about how the “assault weapons” ban is just way for the Democrats to get their foot in the door and ban handguns. And now, before the legislation is even introduced, they’ve gone ahead and shown their hand.

But an even bigger problem lurks — right now the focus is only on “assault weapons” and semi-auto handguns, however, as soon as a public crime is committed with a double-action revolver, Feinstein and Co. will try to add those to the list as well.

The bottom line: If we are foolish enough to embrace a ban on any weapon in the coming Congress then we are unwittingly embracing a ban on every weapon.

The Democrats cannot be trusted with our freedoms, and they will politicize every tragedy to accomplish their ends.

Proof of this lies in the fact that Feinstein was just waiting for a open door to push a gun ban anyway. In other words, this isn’t because of Sandy Hook. Reports from early Nov. 2012 were already indicating the she planned to push a assault weapons ban if Obama were re-elected.

Now more than ever, Republican Senators and Reps. must stand up for the individual right to keep and bear arms. Liberty itself is at stake.

Map Shows Employees of Paper that Published Map of Gun Owners

by Warner Todd Huston 27 Dec 2012, 11:56 AM PDT 53 post a comment

The Journal News of suburban Westchester, New York caused outrage by publishing an interactive map showing the names and addresses of New York’s legal firearm owners. In response, a blogger decided to create a map showing the names and addresses of employees of the newspaper.

The blog, “Talk of the Sound,” a New Rochelle, New York-centric website, decided that turnabout was fair play by posting its headlined, “Map: Where are the Journal News employees in your neighborhood?.” The map replicates the gun owners map published by the Journal News, replacing gun owners with newspaper employees.

When the Journal News published the names and addresses of New York’s legal gun owners, the paper claimed that they weren’t breaking the law as the information they published was all public record. The paper said it was just too bad if the gun owners felt their privacy was violated.

This is, of course, quite true. But the interactive map of the newspaper employees is justifiable using the exact same logic. All the names of the employees are public knowledge and all one needs is a name to find an address, which is generally also in public records that anyone can find.

Newspaper employees may be outraged that their privacy was violated, of course, but they didn’t seem to care much about privacy when they publicized the names and addresses of New York’s gun owners. Naturally, their own argument must be turned right back upon them and that is what “Talk of the Sound” did.

Indeed, the newspaper employees are upset, and some are starting to erase their Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin accounts in response. Of course, none of this would have happened if the paper hadn’t decided to act in a political manner in the first place.

After all, there is no news in the names and addresses of legal gun owners. These people aren’t criminals and these individuals have no bearing on the story of the Sandy Hook massacre.

There was one reason and one reason only for the newspaper to publish the names and addresses of New York’s gun owners: intimidation. The paper meant to scare these law abiding citizens. It was nothing but a bullying tactic.

Worse, by taking this action, the Journal News intended to put New York’s law abiding firearm owners on the same level as the murderer at Sandy Hook Elementary.

Still, turn about really is fair play. If The Journal can claim a right to publish “public records” then so can bloggers.

Another blog, For What It’s Worth, also has an extensive list of Journal News employees.

Who has the gold? The Banks have it!

While we are being told to pay more in taxes to pay the interest on the debt for money borrowed from the privately owned Federal Reserve, the banks are hording gold!  London has a city within called the City of London.  They have their own judicial system and act independent from the rest of the world. It’s sort of like the Vatican. They have lots of gold too: