Home > Content > Creation and Evolution > Discussion: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
16 Comments - 2847 Views
Submitted By Ellman on 09/05/20
FreeHovind, Ellman, Creation and Evolution 

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0005723
I quote this site:
"...particular importance to phylogenetic studies, the absence of a toilet claw and a toothcomb demonstrates that Darwinius masillae is not simply a fossil lemur, but part of a larger group of primates, Adapoidea, representative of the early haplorhine diversification."

According to this site there is yet to be more research on this animal remains.
http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps/2009/05/poor_poor_ida_or_overselling_a.php

More good sources:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090519-ida-primate-fossil-link.html

http://www.revealingthelink.com/

Is that enough evidence for us to end this discussion about creation?

» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: Another evidence for Darwins theory.
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/05/20 - 14:19 GMT
Video with sir David Attenborough talking about the discovery.

http://www.revealingthelink.com/the-implications/

"finally confirms Charles Darwin's theory of evolution."
from Scientists Unveil Missing Link In Evolution, sky.com, May 19, 2009
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 3,026v
Posted 2009/05/22 - 19:06 GMT
That is crap, you should be ashamed to have even put that up there.
 
They found "primate" bones did they? Not an ape? Not a human? right ...
 
First, if it was human, you don't know it had children, you don't know how old it is & It clearly says, "IT CAME IN TWO DIFFERENT PARTS". And never mind the fact the the two parts are the size of a BABY!
 
If this is the empirical evidence for, "Evolution", then I worry for the future. How ridiculous. This will be one of the great laughs of our time.
This jolly pile of dodo is nothing more than a media hype because people are desperate to share a common heritage with earthworms. You go get em'! This monstrosity is hyped up and is thoroghly undeserved.
 
Other than a few different teeth, a single ankle bone that is unlike that of modern lemurs, and the absence of modern lemurs' "toilet claw," Ida is very lemur-like. To be a link in the chain of an evolutionary development toward apes, "Ida would have to have anthropoid-like features that evolved after anthropoids split away from lemurs and other early primates. Here, alas, Ida fails miserably," Chris Beard of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History wrote in New Scientist. He also said that "Ida is not a ‘missing link'—at least not between anthropoids and more primitive primates." Duke University paleontologist Richard Kay stated that there is no "analysis to support the claims" that Ida is a missing link. Likewise, Duke paleoanthropologist Elwyn Simons stated that Ida is "not telling us too much that we didn't know before."
 
Ida's teeth have been the object of particular attention. The earliest teeth that have been found in the fossil record are fully formed, complete with exquisite enamel microstructure, just as Ida's has. If blind evolutionary changes had managed to develop teeth, then a vast majority of fossils should demonstrate abnormal dentition as jaws and teeth gradually changed shapes until they began working properly. Instead, "up and running" occlusion is observed, with the contours of the upper and lower teeth precisely fitting together when the jaws are closed. Ida's teeth were perfectly formed, with her milk teeth in place and adult teeth forming behind them.
 
There are 300 or more genes controlling the formation of teeth and jaws. One gene, called Osr2, is a control switch. It was designed by the Creator to work in concert with two other genes to make sure that erupting teeth form at just the right place. Thus, though some of Ida's teeth were different from those of modern lemurs, they were well constructed, having been formed in just the right times and places to be well-suited for this particular primate.
 
paleontologist Kurt Wise stated:
 
"There are many such forms in the present (platypus, lesser panda, pronghorn, etc.)—none of which are evolutionary intermediate forms, but which (rather) are a testimony of a wise Creator God Who can combine characteristics in a wide variety of ways and create from them a marvelously designed organism."

Both creation and evolutionary scientists recognize the reality that Ida does not reflect the claims of the publicity campaign. The extravagant marketing of the latest fossil purporting to be "proof of evolution" seems to have been timed for the effective sale of the evolutionary theory itself. The well-structured media event seems designed to coincide with the 2009 Darwinian Bicentennial, but unfortunately for evolution, Ida exhibits no connection with humans. She does demonstrate, however, just what biblically-informed science predicts—a fully-formed distinct creature buried in a catastrophic event.

As has been the case with every other supposed missing link, there is controversy over Ida's place in the evolutionary story. One reason that published opinions on the subject are consistently inconsistent could be that all the evolutionary researchers involved are laboring under a false paradigm. If Ida's "missing link" status were remotely discernible by an objective comparison of features, then Chris Beard, an expert on primate phylogeny, would not have told Nightline, "This fossil is not as close to monkeys, apes, and humans as we are being led to believe." Many other evolutionary scientists are expressing frustration over the unjustified hype accompanying Darwinius.

Adding injury to insult, anatomically modern lemurs have been found in rock strata below Ida. Likewise, monkeys have been found in lower layers, which evolutionists believe represent eons of time before Ida's appearance. Thus, Ida is too completely formed and was found in a layer, according to evolutionary timescales, that is too young for her to be the link connecting the earliest primates to descendants that supposedly led to humans. Underneath all the fanfare, Ida's evolutionary status is just more hype.

http://www.icr.org/article/4642/

Even CNN (corrupt news network) can easily spot the fraud;

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1900057,00.html
 
Point being, those that desperately want to be related to all life, despite the obvious reality, are willing to go to any lengths to nuture that wishful thinking.
 
On a side note, I believe those lengths have been dangerous and will likely be hazardous in the future.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
10 hours - 500v
Posted 2009/05/22 - 19:51 GMT
Apes and humans, like lemurs, are primates.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/22 - 22:14 GMT
"They found "primate" bones did they? Not an ape? Not a human? right ..."
 
OI! LEARN TAXONOMY!
 WE ARE APES!
WE ARE PRIMATES!
WE ARE VERTABRETES!
 
 
"First, if it was human, you don't know it had children, you don't know how old it is & It clearly says, "IT CAME IN TWO DIFFERENT PARTS". And never mind the fact the the two parts are the size of a BABY!"
 
you fail at understanding commen ancestory... again.....
 
"If this is the empirical evidence for, "Evolution", then I worry for the future."
 
again...fail....im NOT going to adress why, i've done so to many times....
 
"You go get em'! This monstrosity is hyped up and is thoroghly undeserved."
you didn't read
did you?
 
"If blind evolutionary changes had managed to develop teeth, then a vast majority of fossils should demonstrate abnormal dentition as jaws and teeth gradually changed shapes until they began working properly. Instead, "up and running" occlusion is observed, with the contours of the upper and lower teeth precisely fitting together when the jaws are closed. Ida's teeth were perfectly formed, with her milk teeth in place and adult teeth forming behind them."
 
GODDAM! you fail SO HARD at understanding natural selection.......
 
"paleontologist Kurt Wise stated:"
 
oh yes...quotign a YEC is gonna convince us...
 
"Ida exhibits no connection with humans. She does demonstrate, however, just what biblically-informed science predicts—a fully-formed distinct creature buried in a catastrophic event."
 
...my head actually start hurting at your stupidity...
you really REALLY need to get a understandign of evolutionary theory....
 
"Many other evolutionary scientists are expressing frustration over the unjustified hype accompanying Darwinius."
10 it's the media NOT THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY, whos over promoting this.
2) you're quote minign Beard. he still agrees witht eh significance of the find, he just doesn't support the hype.....and he STILL accepts commen ancestory...
 
 
"On a side note, I believe those lengths have been dangerous and will likely be hazardous in the future."
 
/bashing the science that brought you so much advancements in medicine.
 
"he fossil is so perfectly preserved because Ida probably died quickly and nonviolently; her resting place was an abandoned quarry called the Messel Pit, near Frankfurt. At the time she lived, the pit was a lake out of which poisonous volcanic gases probably belched from time to time. Likely felled by such an outburst, she tumbled into deep, oxygen-poor water where she would have been buried by sediments before she could decompose. Indeed, the Messel Pit is such a rich source of well-preserved fossils that it's been designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site."
 
from YOUR SITE.
so not "cataclysm" here....
 
omg....i jsut read the irc article....you jsut blindly parotted sections of it....
GJ AT SOURCE CHEKING!
 
btw i need to see this part
"Adding injury to insult, anatomically modern lemurs have been found in rock strata below Ida. Likewise, monkeys have been found in lower layers, which evolutionists believe represent eons of time before Ida's appearance."
 
vindicated. so it mustn be a quotemine or used out of ignorance of twhat evolution would predict.
 
plz gimmi that source...i'm to tired to do it myself atm.
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/22 - 22:17 GMT
"Is that enough evidence for us to end this discussion about creation?"
 
not by  a LONG shot.
 
creationists will never give up...
 
but hey neither will science!
 
btw you might have made it more apparent that this is just a spectacular find, and not imply the media hype.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 2:09 GMT
lol this cracked me up:
"It was designed by the Creator to work in concert with two other genes to make sure that erupting teeth form at just the right place."
- Like he doesn't know how genes come by.

And yes i maybe should have said it was a media hype, but i gave you the link of a site that was somewhat negative to the hype and how much research that had been done on it.

The reason why i posted this was because i found it funny how every newspaper i read that day started with "Darwins was right!".

And there is evidence enough, just keeps pileing up.
Creationists like 9tails never seem to get waht we're talking about... Like claiming Ida was a human or that we don't know the age of the fossil.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
4 days - 5,621v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 3:22 GMT
Remember when they found the first missing link? Here's some about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 3,026v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 4:11 GMT
Ah, yes, Piltdown man. I like what wiki says about it.
 
"and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure as a forgery."
 
This is an example of what I'm talking about. People are so dense, that it took OVER FORTY YEARS before the lie could not be denied any longer. And one day, soon enough, people will realize that they are all frauds.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 8:14 GMT
"This is an example of what I'm talking about. People are so dense, that it took OVER FORTY YEARS before the lie could not be denied any longer. And one day, soon enough, people will realize that they are all frauds."
 
well it WAS quite well made, and people had very little fosisls to compare it with. but when the evidence started turning up it became overwhelming...
 
 
i don't get how you can argue agaisnt this hoax, when theconclusion drawn from the evidence that was used to prove the haox, is one that SUPPORTS evolution.
 
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 8:11 GMT
"Remember when they found the first missing link? Here's some about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man"
 
that was a hoax made for publicity.
 
ironically it was exposed when we started finding more REAL humaniod remains.
 
and what point do you think making fun of a  100+ year old hoax will make?
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/05/23 - 12:19 GMT
not too mention the dating methods has been refined and that Ida is a very delicate fossil and can't be pulled apart.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
4 days - 5,621v
Posted 2009/05/24 - 2:38 GMT

Here's a wonderful story about the new "link" Ida. Many scientists are not impressed by this find and know it's probably just another hopeful dream like Piltdown man. This story is from TIME: magazine. Get over it guys we don't come from monkey like creatures. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1900057,00.html
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/24 - 7:30 GMT
"Here's a wonderful story about the new "link" Ida. Many scientists are not impressed by this"
 
yes they are, because it's such a complete fossil, the stomach content can even be determined.
 
"find and know it's probably just another hopeful dream like Piltdown man."
 
the main difference being that Ida is not a hoax.
 
the second difference being that it's the MEDIA NOT the scientific community, who are "idolazing" this fossil.
 
Ida is a fossil from the period primates evolved.so it's a link.
it's NOT claimed that ida is a direct link between humans.
it's more likely that ida is a speices that branched from the commen ancestor we shared with lemurs.
 
"Get over it guys we don't come from monkey like creatures."
 
for the last time. we ARE monkies according to phylogenetics.
and funny enough even according to a 18th century CREATIONIST, we ARE apes.
 
humans aren't "special", we're just another species trying to survive.
the difference is we evolved a high intelligence to manipulate our surroundings.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/05/24 - 12:53 GMT
"The second reason the discovery is so important is its age. Ida — her scientific name is Darwinius masillae — dates to about 47 million years ago, when temperatures were warmer than they are today and when mammals underwent a burst of evolutionary diversification. In particular, that's when primates began splitting off into two branches. One became anthropoids, whose descendants are monkeys, apes and humans. The other turned into prosimians — lemurs and their kin."
- Nice link bigdog, it contradicts your beliefs.

"Ida is intriguing because she has some characteristics of both branches, which suggests that she could be a transitional animal that gave rise to the anthropoids and, ultimately, to us. "How transitional it is," says Novacek, "is a matter of debate and further study."
- Still shows how science work.

"Ida could at best be considered a first step on an evolutionary pathway that took another 40 million years to reach the divergence point between chimps and our earliest hominid ancestors."
- Nothing wrong here.

"Most paleontologists will roll their eyes at that sort of overhyped nonsense, especially given that there's real science lurking underneath. After wading through the false advertising, though, most people might have a hard time finding it."
- Still science at work. It should say "a missing link" and not "THE". Science tells us to think critically and this has a lot of them done. Even if the newspapers hyped it badly, it doesn't change the fact that it is a fossil of a very old age and it shares a lot of characteristics of apes and monkeys.

"humans aren't "special", we're just another species trying to survive.
the difference is we evolved a high intelligence to manipulate our surroundings."
- We follow the same evolutionary rules for our development and actions.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
4 days - 5,621v
Posted 2009/05/24 - 22:02 GMT

I'd like to see how they found the age of this fossil. Probably radio metric dating which has proven to have major errors.
» Reply to Comment
Re: Oldest primate fossil found: the missing link
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/05/25 - 10:46 GMT
NO FOR FUCK SAKE! IF it was proven it would have been corrected so that it works or we would have discarded the method. That we have not! It's no a conspiracy bigdog, you're just to ignorant to understand that.

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/as_old_as_time_plimer.htm
An article that was submitted in the skeptic, Vol. 20, No. 1

bigdog u liar, forgot about the "thou shalt not bear false witness"?


This website is powered by Plexpedia
Usage of this site constitutes agreement to the » Legal Stuff