There is some criticism of exactly where this fossil fits on the evolutionary tree with respect to man, but as one report put it, if this species isn’t our great, great… grandmother, it’s definitely a great, great… aunt. One thing isn’t disputed: this and other fossils found at the ancient lake site in Germany are some of the best ever found from the period.
Meet “Ida,” the small “missing link” fossil that’s created a big media splash and will likely continue to make waves among those who study human origins.
In a new book, documentary, and promotional Web site, paleontologist Jorn Hurum, who led the team that analyzed the 47-million-year-old fossil seen above, suggests Ida is a critical “missing link” species in primate evolution.
The fossil, he says, bridges the evolutionary split between higher primates such as monkeys, apes, and humans and their more distant relatives such as lemurs.
“This is the first link to all humans,” Hurum, of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, said in a statement. Ida represents “the closest thing we can get to a direct ancestor.”
Ida, properly known as Darwinius masillae, has a unique anatomy. The lemur-like skeleton features primate-like characteristics, including grasping hands, opposable thumbs, clawless digits with nails, and relatively short limbs.
#110 Olo
“Creationism science” doesn’t make testable hypothesis, they just spout post hoc silliness. Arguing that the universe sits on the back of sea turtle is just a valid. It’s obvious it has little to do with science but they do whine a lot louder than most people. Most of them are trolls, and they know it. They consciously spout this nonsense because it gives them a smug sense of collective superiority.
They don’t bring a serious game which is, in my opinion, sad. I think religious speculation and philosophy have a lot to offer the world (even though I don’t believe any of it). There are many religious philosophers and theologians that I respect and read very carefully. However, when they play pseudo-science it’s embarrassingly pathetic since they are arguing bad 12th century theology.
#94
As you know, even if every scientific theory that explains evolution were entirely wrong, it would in no way, shape or form provide any credence to support creationism.
#100
> I was very careful to consider
> the major arguments supporting
> the opposing theories…creationism
> is the only sound explanation of
> origins…the only one that is
> “falsifiable” (=based upon facts
> which, if overturned, disproves
> the theory), unlike evolution,
> which morphs itself whenever
> contrary fact is found.
Could the evidence of your ignorance about the scientific method be any more apparent? As Buckley would say, you are ignorant a outrance. The “only” sound explanation?! Claiming that the Easter Bunny dropped eggs full of DNA is as sound a guess as creationism and has the same level of supporting evidence.
One of the core reasons that creationism is not science is specifically BECAUSE it is not falsifiable.
#102
It would be better to say that the theories of gravity has as much faith as the theories of evolution.
#104
Alfred1 must be the ancient name for clueless. In nature there are many more species which have far more efficient eye designs than those of humans. The theories of evolution do not state that all attributes are entirely and completely geared towards survival. Attributes can evolve independently and it might be the case that one evolutionary trait, like say intelligence (despite your comments) is far more important to survival than another (like say having a more efficient design for the eye). It is why we have vestigial organs. Go to TalkOrigins.org and every argument you have against evolution has been answered and with references.
#106
Do you at least accept the observable fact that species evolve? Forget the causes or speed of that evolution, do you at least recognize that species evolve?
I totally believe in evolution. Liberals came from monkey shit.
#101 qb asks, “can I sacrifice my neighbour’s cat? It keeps crapping in my garden.”
The Big Bang has told me, his one and only oracle on earth, that your neighbor’s cat would make a pleasing sacrifice. If your neighbor tries to interfere, let him suffer the unrestrained wrath of the Big Bang.
Do they still teach as scientific fact in schools, the lie that humans evolved from Neanderthals? Or, did saner heads eventually prevail?
#113;
Evolution says nothing about the most perfect change always winning. It only predicts that the best-adapted member of the species survives.
And you really know nothing about the evolution of the eye.
Read up on it.
I think that it is sad that Dvorak’s site puts itself in a position to mock people for their beliefs in religion. Doing exactly what the church or religion did to those that don’t believe in a God. In a role reversal, this seems to be intolerant, a hint of bigotry, and somewhat disturbing. Sorry that your mommy and daddy tried to have you do something they felt worthwhile and spend time together as a family in church. yeah it’s not right to force something down someone’s throat, but there is no reason to hate on religion as though there is no good from it. Not sure the last time I heard of an Atheist organization that feeds people, comforts people, and has a desire to take of less fortunate. If there is one, it’s just to setup that Atheists can do it to spite religion not because of anything else. All this evidence and posturing is hate speech against people who really just want to help people. Too bad those in religion have done bad things in their gods name, but that doesn’t speak for all. Good thing we fight for freedom of choice for gays, abortion and whatnot – but making fun of people who choose to feel there is something better, that’s horrible and they’re retarded. Sounds like intolerance to me, when the shoe is on the other foot, some people don’t wear it too well.
#123;
Evolution != atheism
“!=” means “does not equal”. I figured I’d explain that since you’re obviously incapable of recognizing simple things such as the difference between persecuting and killing people based upon beliefs (such as the Church did) and mocking people for not comprehending science (such as we are).
Daniel, you live in a world of flowers and joy, for sure. In real life it’s a lot different so get out a bit. If religion is so good why are there hundreds of them, one and only one should be the number right? Why are there evangelists who lie and cheat for money from the ignorant? Why is Scientology allowed anywhere on this planet? Why are there so many religious wars?
Living as an atheist is very liberating, no dogma, no rites, no tithing, not having to believe in an imaginary being and no praying to an imaginary being and no hating other people because they believe in *another* imaginary being.
You should try living with reality for a while and see how it feels. It’s quite refreshing, like a junior mint.
#123 Daniel77, you must go to a very different church than I attended when I was young.
At your church, if believers made a secret-ballot choice between feeding a few starving children and making sure homosexuals could never marry, which do you think they would choose?
If they had to choose between providing care for sick people and instituting a program of school prayer where non-praying children feel uncomfortable, which do you think they would choose?
I think you’ll find that when Christians concentrate on doing helpful things for society with no thought of personal gain, they are seldom mocked. Unfortunately, they often end up trying to impose their will on others with only their religion as justification.
Hopefully, you’re one of the good ones.
#81 – Alfred1,
#48 No scientist believes the big bang anymore…the public hasn’t kept up.
Did all three of your neurons fart at the same time? Where did you get this idea from? I should ask for a link. But, since big bang is as near to fact as anything in science, I won’t even bother to ask.
Here’s NASA’s timeline of the universe. I think you’ll find the words big bang clearly labeled on it.
# 127 Misanthropic Scott said, “But, since big bang is as near to fact as anything in science,…”
Kinda like the “fact” you presented that the last codified scientific laws were presented by Newton? ROFL!
#87 -Alfred1,
#67 String theorists posit multiple dimensions, a notion that is corroborated by ultra cold and super hot matter, its liquid at both states…which requires another dimension…
So how many alternative explanations do scientists suggest?
Zero…they haven’t a clue and if you think they do…then any feelings of inferiority you may have are justified.
Wrong again Alfie. I know you’ll be shocked to hear it since your brain is only capable of believing that something is either True or False, not unknown or several possibilities exist.
However, there are a great many hypotheses for Grand Unified Theories or Theories of Everything (depending on whether you prefer GUTs or TOEs).
Personally, I think strings should still be called String Hypothesis as the hypothesis has yet to make a sound and verified prediction.
However, there is some good data that shows it may be possible, which is more than I can say for god.
That said, there is Quantum Gravity, Loop Quantum Gravity, Strings, Branes, and some that I don’t remember the names of at present.
If you are capable of reading anything other than the bible (but you’re not), you might try reading Warped Passages by Lisa Randall.
Really, of course I’m recommending this to others who may be interested. You haven’t got the brain power for a comic book, let alone a full length book on theoretical physics, even one written for a general audience.
#128 – PatDick,
I posted links you moran! Try reading them before commenting.
#88 – Alfredo,
see post 127.
You posted links showing that Newton was the last to present physical laws? Where?
#89 – Breetai,
Evolution is as much faith as creationism.
Please read posts 55, 57, and 63 and then see if you can post this again.
#93 – Alfred1,
#92 The consistent application of Occam’s Razor shreds evolutionary speculation, cuts out its heart…evolution multiplies entities to get anywhere…it is the least likely explanation of origins, rationally considered.
Repeating and rerepeating the same thing over and over will not make it true. Why not explain how you think so and then I will explain your misunderstandings of both evolution and occam’s razor. OK?
#100 – Alfred1,
… unlike evolution, which morphs itself whenever contrary fact is found.
Examples? When did evolution morph? As you fail to explain this statement, please be sure to keep clear on whether you are talking about evolution, descent with modification, or natural selection, the theory explaining the mechanism for evolution.
#127 Scott…the “scientists believe…” stuff is part of the misinformation campaign being lobbied by many christian websites. The other day I heard an otherwise intelligent young adult tell a friend that “28%” (??) of scientists don’t believe in evolution anymore. My internal BS meter pegged.
Lo and behold, I eventually found a site with that number, whatever it really was. These evangelicals have concocted an entire alternative reality for rebuttal against anyone with little real science knowledge. They email the crap to each other, circulate the “evidence on the web” and eventually have a pile of “facts” they can use to impress their friends. To the average doofus, these alternative realities sound plausible. Unfortunately they’re poisoning the debate with complete garbage and intentional misrepresentations and misinterpretations of long-established facts, theories, and evidence.
Imagine, an evangelical religious leader actually doing something like that. Who woulda thought it possible?
We’re seeing quite a bit the result here.
#104 – Alfred1,
#97 Citation? How about thinking for yourself.
No. You were asked for something to back up your bullshit. Please provide something other than your wacko failed flawed second grade logic.
The human eye has over a thousand distinct parts, if any of those parts fails, eyesight fails.
Clearly anyone who wears glasses should just pull their eyes out of their sockets.
Clearly anyone with a slight blind spot from diabetic retinopathy should do so as well.
As for the eye, you have never answered why our rods and cones are backwards creating blind spots in both eyes where the optic nerve bundle goes through the retina to get to the brain. Squid don’t have such blind spots. Does your god like squid better than humans? Was s/he just practicing on humans to get to perfection in squid?
Therefore, as evolution is where beneficial change survives, non beneficial change does not…how did the process of evolution fail over 1000 times to culminate in eyesight…
Ah … another misunderstanding, much genetic junk can survive. As long as it does no harm, it does not get removed.
Multiply that fail by all the different eyes different species have…and the times the basic premise of evolution failed is astronomical.
Ah yes, the argument from incredulity again. Flawed as always.
What about all of the imperfections in the human body that could not have been there had there been an intelligent designer?
What about our testicles? (I know, you think yours are perfect.) Why did they start out way up in your chest cavity where they belong in fish, only to descend much later in life? Why not start where they belong? That they drop from a location that doesn’t work for mammals opens up the males of our species to high risk of hernia due to the gap left by our fallen testicles.
only in a “non falsifiable theory” are such inconsistencies seen as not proof the theory is false.
Evolution is falsifiable. Show me the precabrian rabbit.
As evolution is NOT based upon reality, as therefore is “non falsifiable”, it is far less likely to be true than Creationism…stands or falls upon facts.
This just might be the funniest thing you’ve ever said. Creationism stands or falls on facts??!!?
One fact! That’s all I ask. One hard fact that supports creationism.
Go.
the whole eye thing aka irreducible complexity has been thoroughly debunked.
But let’s say that it hasn’t. Let’s say that yet, evolution is totally wrong and has nothing to do with reality. OK. How is evolution being wrong evidence that Creationism is right? Evolution being wrong is not in and of itself evidence for Creationism.
“The simplest explanation for a phenomenon is most likely the correct explanation.” How is “God did it” the simplest explanation? How is God violated the laws of the universe that, presumably, God itself created, the simplest explanation? It would seem that if God is all powerful then God could create life without violating the laws of the universe God created.
[a little OT, sorry]
Who is this entity Alfred1 ?
. a bot
. editor invention for slow days
. a human going bad
. a puppet
The question is not important, so I can pull the answer from a hat…
Oh, it says ‘A Paddy-O’ puppet !! …
and PD: Patrick also !!!…
Oh, my!
Alfred, science is an attempt to explain our surroundings. It adapts with the best evidence and is therefore imperfect, but it strives for perfection. Instead of saying God created the universe and all its inhabits in 6 days, and that’s that, aren’t you the least bit curious how it happened? You attack science like it’s some opposing religion. Science is curiosity, not religion.
Concerning your eye argument, of course a benign mutation could accompany an advantageous one. Unless a mutation is harmful, then there is no negative selection. Inactive genes form a majority of the human genome. Those genes provide no benefit so they’re just wasted space. So why are they there?
As for your response to my comment on the Big Bang, please provide evidence of this multitude of scientists who disagree and have moved on to better things. Please help, because I can’t find it anywhere.
This discussion is a great example of the power of religion to do damage to a human mind. I’ve never seen so much willful ignorance. Believing in creationism is like believing the earth is flat or the moon is made out of swiss cheese. Hopefully humanity will someday be able to grow up and break free of these childish superstitions.
#106 – Alfred1,
#104 Only stating facts…Evolution is predicated upon survival of the fittest
You wouldn’t know a fact if it bit you in the ass.
Evolution predates the theory of natural selection by a couple of generations. Erasmus Darwin and Lemark both knew of evolution. Neither had an adequate explanation.
Evolution merely states that today’s species are descended from earlier ones. It really is that simple.
Natural selection is the theory that explains the fact, yes fact, of evolution. Evolution is as factual as gravity. It has made predictions again and again and again and all have come true. It has been the foundation for all of medical science.
Evolution is not predicated on natural selection. Natural selection explains evolution. However, an observable fact needs no explanation, it simply is. It stands on its own. If we can’t explain it, it is still a fact. That we can explain evolution by natural selection makes us much happier, but is not a requirement of evolution.
I know. It’s a lot for one day, especially for one who has just three neurons. So, I’ll stop here for the moment and answer the next reply.
#112 – Mr. Fusion,
I should have done a look ahead. You did an excellent job of explaining the dichotomy.
#113 – Alfred1,
Of course no one can prove a thing to you if you won’t read what we type. Go back. Read again. Then ask your same stupid questions making your same stupid false assertions.
How can we compete with blind stupidity when you won’t even read a post?
Mr. Fusion has done an excellent job explaining the difference between evolution and natural selection. You then go right on contradicting it with the same statements you made before.
Read dammit. Read. You can do it if you try.
Read as literally as you do the bible. See if it can alter a single neuron out of your three.
#127, Scott, thanks for the evolution of the universe timeline. Please realize you’re trying to argue with someone who doesn’t even know how to spell Occam’s razor, much less how it works.
As I was reading all the posts after my last visit, I was struck by the number of intelligent, well written comments by so many posters.
This is for all of you, too many to mention all.
And Alphie, of course I thought of you too. Today’s science lesson.