This is pretty cool.
So whats the link?
The term "missing link" is antiquated and rarely used since evolution is a gradual change over an immense period of time. But this find is just another one of the thousands of examples of transitional species that support evolution.Fossil Ida: extraordinary find is 'missing link' in human evolution
James Randerson guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 19 May 2009 15.30 BST
Scientists have discovered an exquisitely preserved ancient primate fossil that they believe forms a crucial "missing link" between our own evolutionary branch of life and the rest of the animal kingdom.
The 47m-year-old primate – named Ida – has been hailed as the fossil equivalent of a "Rosetta Stone" for understanding the critical early stages of primate evolution.
The top-level international research team, who have studied her in secret for the past two years, believe she is the most complete and best preserved primate fossil ever uncovered. The skeleton is 95% complete and thanks to the unique location where she died, it is possible to see individual hairs covering her body and even the make-up of her final meal – a last vegetarian snack.
"This little creature is going to show us our connection with the rest of all the mammals; with cows and sheep, and elephants and anteaters," said Sir David Attenborough who is narrating a BBC documentary on the find. "The more you look at Ida, the more you can see, as it were, the primate in embryo."
"This will be the one pictured in the textbooks for the next hundred years," said Dr Jørn Hurum, the palaeontologist from Oslo University's Natural History Museum who assembled the scientific team to study the fossil. "It tells a part of our evolution that's been hidden so far. It's been hidden because the only [other] specimens are so incomplete and so broken there's nothing almost to study." The fossil has been formally named Darwinius masillae in honour of Darwin's 200th birthday year.
It has been shipped across the Atlantic for an unveiling ceremony hosted by the mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg today. There is even talk of Ida being the first non-living thing to feature on the front cover of People magazine.
She will then be transported back to Oslo, via a brief stop at the Natural History Museum in London on Tuesday, 26 May, when Attenborough will host a press conference.
Ida was originally discovered by an amateur fossil hunter in the summer of 1983 at Messel pit, a world renowned fossil site near Darmstadt in Germany. He kept it under wraps for over 20 years before deciding to sell it via a German fossil dealer called Thomas Perner. It was Perner who approached Hurum two years ago.
"My heart started beating extremely fast," said Hurum, "I knew that the dealer had a world sensation in his hands. I could not sleep for 2 nights. I was just thinking about how to get this to an official museum so that it could be described and published for science." Hurum would not reveal what the university museum paid for the fossil, but the original asking price was $1m. He did not see the fossil before buying it – just three photographs, representing a huge gamble.
But it appears to have paid off. "You need an icon or two in a museum to drag people in," said Hurum, "this is our Mona Lisa and it will be our Mona Lisa for the next 100 years."
Hurum chose Ida's nickname because the diminutive creature is at the equivalent stage of development as his six-year-old daughter. Hurum said Ida is very excited about her namesake. "She says, 'there are two Idas now, there's me I'm living and then there's the dead one.'"
"It's caught at a really very interesting moment [in the animal's life] when it fortunately has all its baby teeth and is in the process of forming all its permanent teeth," said Dr Holly Smith, an expert in primate development at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, who was part of the team. "So you have more information in it than almost any fossil you could think of."
The fossil's amazing preservation means that the scientific team has managed to glean a huge amount of information from it, although this required new X-ray techniques that had not previously been applied to any other specimens.
The researchers believe it comes from the time when the primate lineage, that diversified into monkeys, apes and ultimately humans, split from a separate group that went on to become lemurs and other less well known species.
Crucially though, Ida is not on the lemur line because she lacks two key characteristics shared by lemurs – a grooming claw on her second toe and a fused set of teeth called a tooth comb. Also, a bone in her ankle called the talus is shaped like members of our branch of the primates. So the researchers believe she may be on our evolutionary line dating from just after the split with the lemurs.
According to the team's published description of the skeleton in the journal PLoS ONE, Ida was 53cm long and a juvenile around six to nine months old. The team can be sure Ida is a girl because she does not have a penis bone.
"She was at this vulnerable age where you are no longer right with your mother," said Smith, "Just as you leave weaning you are not full grown, but you are on your own."
The unprecedented preservation of Ida meant working out how she died was more like a modern day crime scene investigation than the informed guess-work that palaeontologists usually make do with. The team noticed that she had a broken wrist that had begun to partially heal. The injury did not kill her, but they speculate that it contributed to her premature demise.
"It might be that her mother dropped her once or that she fell down from a tree earlier in her life," Smith said. She survived the accident, but her climbing abilities would have been impaired. Unable to drink from water trapped by tree leaves, she would have had to venture down to the lake to drink. This would have proved to be a fateful decision.
The huge range of magnificently preserved fossils at Messel suggest that the volcanic lake was a death trap. Scientists believe that it sporadically let forth giant belches of poisonous volcanic gases that would have immediately suffocated anything in, around and even over the water. Ida would then have fallen into the water and been preserved in the sediment deep at the bottom.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Mountains of mutually agreeable evidence is why evolution is one of the most widely accepted theories today. The other one is the big bang theory.
This is pretty cool.
So whats the link?
This is still just matter of opinion.
Now there is evidence that malnutrition during World War induced diseases in grandchildren's generation. So even without the missing link, evolution would have been a reasonable scientific theory.
And no: it is not "a matter of opinion". Even reasonable Christians agree that evolution is a fact. They just differentiate between mythological/religious narratives and scientific narratives which follow rather different "grammars".
Back to the topic though. Few things jumped out at me.
""This little creature is going to show us our connection with the rest of all the mammals; with cows and sheep, and elephants and anteaters," said Sir David Attenborough who is narrating a BBC documentary on the find. "The more you look at Ida, the more you can see, as it were, the primate in embryo."
I will keep my eye on this. We'll see what comes up in a few years.
"This will be the one pictured in the textbooks for the next hundred years,"
Im not that excited about this, because Neanderthals were once very scary monkey men in text books, and now are pictured much more modern in nature as the scientific theories changed over the years...
"It tells a part of our evolution that's been hidden so far. It's been hidden because the only [other] specimens are so incomplete and so broken there's nothing almost to study."
Would you hang your hat on a theory based on incomplete specimens, that there is almost nothing to study, until now? I'd be a little leery.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Jesus knew his father to be the creator, and expressed this sentiment many times. Being that evolution would deviate from that thought, it is no small wonder Jesus never spoke of evolution as happening in any sense at all.
That is because global travelling was rare if not non existent and human influence on the surrounding environment was sparse, which means there was not that much change to be experienced.
If you were to do a report on Hamlet, and you say it's about pigs and a blanket, I am positive you will have missed the authors theme of the book. The same rule applies to the Bible. It has one overall theme. that is the Vindication of Jehovah's Sovereignty, by means of his heavenly Kingdom, headed by his Son Christ Jesus.
There is a group of people on earth whole ardently study the bible and use just it as a basis for a personal relationship with God, high moral standards, and the hope of a peaceful future for mankind. Just one.
Jesus says in John 8:23-“YOU are from the realms below; I am from the realms above. YOU are from this world; I am not from this world.
The Bible in proverbs Chapter has wisdom personified, and it alludes to Jesus being the personage, or Master worker of God.
Therefore, When Jesus spoke of Being alive before Abraham, or seeing Noah enter the ark, or Adam and Eve, he was speaking as a witness to these events, and attesting to them.
The Bible says Jesus committed no sins against God, so he could not then have been lying about his whereabouts prior to his being made human.
This is why no true follower of Christ can believe that evolution is the cause of life, because Jesus agrees with and even eye witnessed the Biblical accounts of all such happenings.
That only begotten is Jesus. Jesus lived his life in perfect harmony with God's will, and gave an accurate reflection of what God would be like in person. So therefore, it is not true that that we have not seen more of God, he sent his son who acts just like he does! Who would you wanna sit down and converse with, Jesus, or Darwin?
The bible was written by man, But don't you find it funny that none of the men who wrote in it take credit for being it's author? That all of them give credit to Jehovah for the inspiration? And they all lived over different time periods, in vastly different lands at times? In fact 2 tim says
3: 16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.
If it is true that the Bible can be used for Disciplining in righteousness, setting things straight, reproving, and teaching, How can it then be contradictory? That would then mean these verses and others like it are a fallacy.
Only through ardent bible study have I been convinced the Bible is harmonious and sound. It will benefit anyone to take a serious study of the Whole bible before saying it is contradictory, not just bits and pieces.
When I saw the title of this thread I right away knew that there would be some kind of on going debate between an evolutionist and a creationist.These kind of debates have been going on since the beginning of the post Origin of Species era and will continue for many years to come.
Many Atheists and Agnostics embrace the theory of evolution because it gives them a sense of comfort to believe that the religious accounts of creation are fallacious and erroneous.They will do whatever they can to disprove the accuracy of the bible by paraphrasing the subjective arguments of other non believers.I am 90 percent certain that when these people open up a bible they don't do it with objective motives but they rather allow their personal opinions to dictate what the bible actually has to say about their actions.People don't have trouble accepting the bible because they're torn between atheism and theism but the real reason that they won't accept the bible is because they don't want to be held accountable to the laws of a supreme law maker.Notice how they will believe that every author and historian that wrote a book were actual people that inhabited the earth but will tell you that the people in the bible were mythological characters? They will openly believe that guys like Charles Darwin,Isaac Newton, and Copernicus were actual people, even though they never personally met them, but will put Jesus in the same category as Santa Claus and the Greek gods.
To believe that everything in this life happens by chance or coincidence and that the only purpose for us on this planet is to eat, breath, toil and produce offspring is to believe that this life is pretty much obsolete and meaningless.Why should people celebrate the accomplishments of others if everything will eventually come to pass and be easily forgotten by future generations? Why live with this feeling in your heart that tells you that you will be alive on this planet for a very long period of time if more than 150 thousand people die each day? There has to be a greater purpose than what a science text book tells you.
Atheists and agnostics don't do whatever they can to disprove the bible. The scientific evidence does that by itself. I am not an atheist because I don't want to be held accountable to the laws of a supreme leader. I am an atheist because there is zero evidence of god and mountains of facts and evidence that contradicts religion. Or at least a personal god that listens to your thoughts. Plus the bible contradicts itself. It's not that hard to see.
If you actually believe life on earth is 6,000 years old (impossible), every human being came from Adam and Eve (impossible), Noah crammed 2 of every currently living species into a boat (impossible) and every one of those species made the populations that exist today (impossible), Jonah lived in a belly of a whale (impossible), the entire 14 billion year old universe was made for us and that scientists have created a massive worldwide conspiracy to disprove religion...then you my friend are either misinformed, uneducated or delusional.
Facts are facts. And they disprove religion. See above YouTube video I posted about Genesis Revisited and ask yourself why did god create so much evidence for his non-existence and so little for his existence? Plus, I implore you to objectively study astronmomy, genetics, biology and archeaology. I objectively believed the bible. I was raised in a religous family. But knowledge changed my beliefs, not my desire to be a bad person.
Last edited by LJ4ptplay; Aug 20, 2009 at 13:51.
Evolution does not form complex life out of nothing. That's your argument. That god produced life out of nothing. Complex life from evolution is driven by natural selection over an immense period of time.
Plus the argument that things are beautiful and complex therefore they must have been designed is fallacious. If life is too complex and therefore must have been designed, wouldn't the designer have to be equally or more complex and beautiful? Then you would have to ask who designed the designer? Because he is too complex, something must have designed him.
In addition, life being comlex certainly does not lead to a designer especially one like you believe. But you want to believe that we have to brush our teeth twice a day or else they'll fall out because Adam and Eve were convinced by a talking snake to eat an apple.
And I don't trust your group's prophecies. You guys are like 0 out of 100.
Last edited by LJ4ptplay; Aug 23, 2009 at 11:56.
What I do know is that the Bible eludes to there being three PERFECT human beings. Adam and Eve, and later down the Line Christ Jesus. Once Adam and Eve sinned, they began to feel the effects of death, since that was the penalty for sin. Which is why they began to get sick, old and die. Just like we do. If Jesus was not wrongfully Killed, he'd still be here according to God's word of how long a perfect man shall live. Never heard of Jesus being sick or anything, and his intelligence is beyond compare. No man who ever lived is lauded the way he is and for good reason. Who's word shall I take about Jehovah, Adam, Eve, Noah, etc.. Jesus, or Science's? Easy choice.
My "group" does not have prophecies. However, God's word does. But my group does take a keen interest in God's word, and keep on the watch as to how things will unfold. I have mentioned before this scripture, but I will rehash it today to finish up.
Acts 1:6 When, now, they had assembled, they went asking him: “Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to YOU to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction; 8 but YOU will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon YOU, and YOU will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Ju·de´a and Sa·mar´i·a and to the most distant part of the earth.”
This is the last time his disciples would see him on earth, for he was about to ascend to heaven at this point. But this was after his resurrection, and he appeared to upwards of 500 people. Notice they were so eager to see the Kingdom restored, that they thought perhaps then was the time. But clearly it was not as Jesus said Jehovah placed that specific time in his own jurisdiction. And he eluded to a massive preaching work that had to be done about the Kingdom to the worlds most distant parts. But What Jesus didn't do was even more telling. He did not berate them for having wrong thoughts about the time of the end, he did not call them false prophets as those religious leaders in his day were. He simply corrected their thinking, and put them on the right path.
Now if its true as the bible calls Jesus the faithful and true witness of Jehovah, if they were false prophets, he would have had no dealings beyond preaching truth to them at all, even less appearing to them after his death for 40 days. Jesus only draws close to those who draw close to his Father as well as himself. That applied for the disciples in Jesus day, to now. Just because Jehovah's witnesses have had wrong ideas about exactly when the end would come is not even new hat, biblically speaking. What's most important to God is that they adhere to his word, laws and principles, and keep on the watch. That is what Jehovah's witnesses do. And it must be ok with Jehovah because there has never been more witnesses of Jehovah at the same time on earth, ever.
Jesus said gave a multi faced sign that would identify the end of a system of things in Mathew 24. At verse 14 this jumps out 14 "And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come."
You can look away, you can turn your nose up, you can kick rocks, throw rocks, do whatever you need to do, but this prophecy is HAPPENING. There is nothing you or science can do or say that can defy this. IT IS HAPPENING. Notice that a group of people called Jehovah's witnesses are preaching the good news of God's Kingdom all over the globe (even some of the most remote) Giving a witness, as the world keeps plunging further and further into madness. But before the end comes, the news will have to be preached enough for God's liking. Since the end is not yet, there must be still some people left that God feels will adhere to his will. He does want to save as many that want to listen. But he has to allow them to hear first, correct?
Bible prophecy 1 opposition 0. I'll keep count as we go along.
Then, myself being in pre-rebuttal mode (because I know you think we should be perfect but are not because of an imposible story) wanted to display the logical fallacy for which I knew you would have answered to the above argument. You then focus on the details that have no pertinent meaning to the logic of the argument. I don't care if it wasn't an apple. Who gives a **** about that? It could have been a freaking grapefruit for all I care. The point was that you believe we have to brush our teeth twice a day because Adam and Eve were convinced by a snake to sin, not because bacteria will destroy your teeth if you don't take care of them. Which is utterly ridiculous.
And your prophecy is, to be brutally honest, full of ****.
You're saying becaue the word "witness" is used that it is a sign of prophecy being fulfilled.And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come."
In another version of the bible it states:
So, 1.) you are misinterpreting the meaning of "witness". (not surprising you guys misinterpret the bible all the time) and 2.) What about a religous group calling themselves Jehova's Testimony? And them claiming their understanding of the bible and the prophecies is the best because the word "testimony" is in their names?And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Do you understand the argument and logic I'm presenting? Probably not. You guys have real trouble in intrepreting things. Even quotes in the bible which you all claim to be the best at understanding. I'm sure you will go off on some tangent about some little word in the argument but not the argument itself.
*waits for meaningless and illogical reply*