The "Ida" fossil - plugging another "hole" in the ToE

Safe-Keeper

My avatar is not a Drumpf hat
Safe-Keeper
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
13,966
Location
Norway
Ida35_None.full.jpg


I'm personally intrigued by the discovery of this fossil, which is supposedly so old that it gives scientists invaluable knowledge on our origins. Anyone else heard of it?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/may/19/fossil-ida-missing-link
 
Just saw this at work on the Yahoo page.

Stated that there is talk of this being the first "non-living" cover of People magazine.
 
This is just further clear evidence of the invalidity of evolution. Prior to this discovery, where this fossil goes there was one gap in the fossil record - now there's two!

See, even more missing links. Evolution just continues to be further discredited!
 
Safe-Keeper said:
I'm personally intrigued by the discovery of this fossil, which is supposedly so old that it gives scientists invaluable knowledge on our origins. Anyone else heard of it?
Click to expand...

Yes. Likely overhyped. It's a great fossile but the species is little different from ones with already have and the odds of it being a dirrect ancestor of humans and monkeys is limited.
 
But-- but-- it's in the Google logo!

missinglink.gif

It must be important!

What I personally disliked is that it's touted as "the missing link", and that now evolution is finally proven or somesuch. Deeply misleading.
 
icerat said:
This is just further clear evidence of the invalidity of evolution. Prior to this discovery, where this fossil goes there was one gap in the fossil record - now there's two!

See, even more missing links. Evolution just continues to be further discredited!
Click to expand...

I presume you are being ironic...? Even a diehard anti-evolutionist would not make such a logically flawed statement.
 
Manning said:
I presume you are being ironic...? Even a diehard anti-evolutionist would not make such a logically flawed statement.
Click to expand...

Yes, he is - but he is making it because many die-hard anti-evolutionists have indeed made that statement - each time a new fossil in a line has been discovered.
 
Pfft. It's not a missing link cuz it doesn't look anywhere near human!

*ducks and runs*

Well, that is what the fundies are saying!

Trait? What's a trait??? budddabum.
 
Manning said:
I presume you are being ironic...? Even a diehard anti-evolutionist would not make such a logically flawed statement.
Click to expand...

The irony was in metal bar form but as to your latter - Oh yes, yes they would.
 
Pfft. It's not a missing link cuz it doesn't look anywhere near human!

*ducks and runs*

Well, that is what the fundies are saying!
Click to expand...
Yup, just saw that as a comment over at bt.no, the city paper from where I first got the news. "This can't be our descendent because it doesn't look human".

I call appeal to incredulity.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Pfft. It's not a missing link cuz it doesn't look anywhere near human!

*ducks and runs*

Well, that is what the fundies are saying!

Trait? What's a trait??? budddabum.
Click to expand...


One of them on another board where I post said: "How can it be a missing link when its tail is longer than its body?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom