I am sorry but I can not find the user that requested this information so Ill post it to everyone.
Im sorry it took so long to reply to your post asking for one proof of Evolution that was later proven false. I wanted to go home and get the information. I must confess however that I gave them out on a loan to a friend and they lost them in a resent move. Since I am unable to recall the titles or authors, I will have to use the web as my reference point.
At any rate, your request was for one, I have listed four. All of these can easily be checked using the web so Ill leave the actual web site references to you. I used Google as my search engine.
Java Man (Pithecanthropus erectus)
In 1891 Dubois' laborers found a skull cap along the Solo River near the village Trinil, Java. A year later and approximately 50 ft. away from the skullcap he found a femur.
Today Java man is classified as Homo erectus but questions still remain, one of which is whether the skullcap and femur are from the same specimen. Recent opinions suggest that the femur is a modern type, which leads to a dilemma for evolutionists
Piltdown Man (Eoanthropus dawsoni)
In 1908 a workman at a gravel pit in Piltdown, England found a portion of a human skull and gave it to an amateur geologist by the name of Charles Dawson. Subsequent digging by Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum and Catholic paleontologist-priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin revealed more skull fragments and the lower jaw of Piltdown man. The Piltdown pit also produced fossil bones of elephant, mastodon, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, beaver and deer. Most scientists accepted this find as a genuine subhuman ancestor of man. For forty-five years, until 1953, this find was considered to be a missing link between man and ape. The only problem was that this was a total hoax! Someone had taken a human skullcap and a jaw of an orangutan, filled the teeth and planted the evidence.
Nebraska Man (Hesperopithecus haroldcookii)
In 1922 a single tooth was found in Pliocine deposits in western Nebraska. Dr. Henry Fairfeild Osborn of Columbia University, head of the American Museum of Natural History, determined that this tooth had characteristics of chimpanzee, Pithecanthropus (Java man), and man. A few years later more evidence was found and the tooth was determined to be from an extinct pig! Little publicity was given to the error.
Although I did not attend the Missouri lecture given by Dr. Johanson, I did have the privilage and honor to attend one of his lectures at a different venue. In that lecture, he restated many of the facts listed below on the Lucy discovery. In all fairness, I never heard him make the statement that Evolution is a fact so I will have to trust the web source that makes that claim. He did verify that Lucy was found in an area that was 1 ½ mile by 1 ½ mile and approximately 200ft deep. In my opinion, this is not very conclusive.
Lucy (replacement for the outmoded australopithecines)
The bones comprising Lucy were found by Donald Johanson and Tom Gray on the 24th of November 1974, at the site of Hadar in Ethiopia. Lucy is a partial fossil skeleton, about the size of a chimpanzee, supposedly female. It is more complete than most fossil finds in that about 40 percent of the bones of the body have been recovered. According to Dr. Johanson, she walked upright! Her brain size is still small, ape-like in proportion, and most of the other features are predominantly ape-like. Some say that anatomically it is not different than a modern chimpanzee. The jaw, in particular, is distinct in that it is V-shaped, totally unlike human jaws. The knee bones were actually discovered about a year earlier than the rest of Lucy. They were found about 200 feet lower and two to three kilometers away.
Dr. Johanson gave a lecture at the University of Missouri in Kansas City, Nov. 20, 1986, on Lucy. When Dr. Johanson was asked, given the wide range in which the total find was found why he was sure all of the bones belonged to Lucy, his reply was "Anatomical similarity." Please keep in mind many animals have anatomical similarities such as bears and dogs.
Dr. Johanson argued that homology (particularly DNA homology) is good proof for evolution. It was pointed out at that time that similar structures nearly always have similar plans. After more discussion along this line, Dr. Johanson gave this amazing reply: "If you don't believe homology, then you don't believe evolution, and evolution is a fact!" (emphasis mine)
(This seems to be more and more pervasive in todays society; the statement Dr. Joanson made, evolution is a fact!)
With that, I will have to bid you all goodbye. I no longer feel Im a good fit for this board. Ive had my honesty, educational level, degree, and job performance questioned and belittled. Finally, I was even threatened with bodily harm, . Sometimes we wish we could come over and (figuratively) hit y'all over the head till y'all finally get this ., The phrase sent my way, all in good fun. I dont think personal attacks make for good discussion points. I found myself getting defensive and falling into the same trap; i.e. stooping to that level in my replies. Not a very good place to go for a Bible Thumping, Back Woods, Christian. All this compassion from conservatives is just too overwhelming.
I now happily concede that I am not a Real Scientist. (ref: "Salem Hypothesis") I now identify myself as a Technician / Engineer. Ill keep my eyes and ears open for any Scientist that claims they dont believe in Evolution and let them know theyve been reclassified so they dont run the risk of public humiliation.
But so I dont disappoint the fans Ive seemed to have made here, let me sign off with .
I havta go now youal. Have to get back to doin that stuff that crazy company I work for pays me for. By the way, Ima startin a new book tomorrow call See Dick Run. Ima told that it a real thrillr. Please feel free to ping away. It will give you something to do for the rest of the day. All meant in good fun of course.
On a more serious note, I do wish each of you all the best, especially those who launched the personal attacks, and I hope that Free Republic continues to grow.
BTW, the formal definition of the word proof :n. (please note 3b. I am not convinced or persuaded by the consideration of the evidence used for Evolution.)
1. The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
a. The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions.
b. A statement or argument used in such a validation.
a. Convincing or persuasive demonstration: was asked for proof of his identity; an employment history that was proof of her dependability.
b. The state of being convinced or persuaded by consideration of evidence.
4. Determination of the quality of something by testing; trial: put one's beliefs to the proof.