This is an excellent example of how the National Geographic's
biased macro-evolutionary point of view is used to
"predetermine" the outcome of an artists work.

The Geographic's art department gave casts of 7 incomplete bone fragments (left) to 4 "candidates" who would be competing for a very prestigious, possibly lucrative, position with a highly respected and well known magazine.

These "candidates" were told that the bones were from a "female", (how they know this is a mystery) Homo habilis fossil. They were also told that "she" is a two-million year old (using falsified radiometric dating methods) evolutionary ancestor of man and that they were looking for a "realistic-looking hominid".

Wanting to please their possible future employer, these artists "independently" produced the 4 very "different" ancestors you see here.

Based on these "guidelines", predetermined results and an artist wanting to land a job, you get the results you see. This is not "empirical science". It is "metaphysical science" pure and simple!

If bones as few as these were purported to be the remains of an unknown missing or murdered individual, and a lawfully employed forensic anatomist was asked to "accurately" reconstruct the person to whom they belong, what do you think they would say? We think they would say, "IMPOSSIBLE!"

The California Institute of Omniology has no problem with the National Geographic Society embracing this metaphysical point of view, BUT we do have a problem with this view being portrayed as factual or scientifically accurate. Intellectual honesty requires the preface "WE BELIEVE" when empirical proof is lacking.

Click here for

Return to Contents