"Missing Link" Found? No, But it's a Cool Fossil

fossil.

It's a good thing that you and other science journalists and bloggers are bringing this up. The stories I saw on World News last night about it were good and didn't emphasize that it was THE missing link. However Charlie Gibson said twice when teasing and introducing the story that this was "the oldest fossil ever found in history, far older", which is in no way true and really bugged me. Then I see the GMA story today with the lower third saying "Meet The Missing Link - 'The Eight Wonder of the World'". Things like this confuse people and misrepresent the actual significance of the fossil.

Ned - Thanks for following up on this. It is indeed a great specimen to add to our knowledge, but I think Hurum may still be pushing it even with that quote about "changing people's view."
Most biologists would have been aware that a primitive primate would look more or less like this, so while this is great it is hardly "view-changing.

I suppose it depends on what a person's view WAS. There are those who seem to think scientists are using this one find to prove that evolution happened AT ALL. No, that has already been done. This is just another useful piece in the puzzle.

a shrew? huh? that's a rodent and it doesn't look anything like that picture beyond sharing the characteristic of having 4 legs.

I see the missing link walking around every day. LOL.

This story just keeps me in awe. The response from Mr Christian himself, Mr answering to a greater father has had a little twist-about on that issue. Are you kidding me? Bush was elected TWICE because of the Christian right. He totally snubbed Al Gore on the global warming, in essence snubbing science itself. Now he has moved the Bible from his desk to his bookshelf next to the Dan Brown books? Quite a backslider:

What an amazing discovery this is I was not however pleased with the presses take on this or their attempts at hyping this situation to boost ratings.Ida may indeed be A missing link in the evolution of creatures man has yet to make a solid connection with Not one scientist has said this is OUR missing link between man and primate I wish the press would get that message. This find is going to be a usefull tool for man to discover how differing creatures have changed / evolved over many years and an ever changing environmet.

One fossil does not a theory prove.

Oldhickory, true, but millions of fossils do present alot of evidence.

Great find. I do, like many others, agree that labelling it as a missing link is undermining science. They're also right in that I've never heard any scientist use the term missing link. Over-hyping of things like this is what causes the confusion of the masses. It's no wonder people don't like evolution. They don't understand it. That and they don't understand the scientific process. That you go through the hypothesis, then you test it, if it passes you get a theory, then you keep testing it, when it's proven, it becomes scientific law, which is fact. Thats a dumbed down version, but thats what it is.

I have seen the theory of gravity thrown around lately. I must say that it is amusing that not one of the anti-evolution people have said a thing about it. To me, that points to a hypocrasy in their view. They won't dispute the theory of gravity, but will dispute the theory of evolution, and base the dispute on the word theory. Funny stuff.

That should be the anti-evolution people haven't said athing about the theory of gravity. I can't spell.

If God wanted us to believe in a divine design and not in science, why would he have created false diversions in the form of fossils, measurable universal forces and evolutionary mutations for us to witness, all of which would seek to undermine true devotion? The missing link will be found someday.

God created the total material energy, then glanced upon it impregnating it with all the conditioned souls thus creating a Big Bang. The material bodies of these souls developed based on their Karma, and where they were seeded - thus Evolution. So, you see...there is an Intelligence behind all science. Now all you scientists and all you belivers can rejoice together!

Hey, it has eyes and ers! It MUST be human!!!

Why don't WE have four legs, too?

Mr. Incredible:
"Why don't WE have four legs, too?"

We do. We just don't walk on two of them very often.

I'm surprised this hasn't blown up into a huge debate. I usually enjoy those. I wonder what's goin on? There's been hardly any anti-evolution proponents posting. Ned, we need global warming, stem cell research, abortion or gun control science post. Or a nice story about puppies. Either one.

Note from Ned--

Hello, Lawrence. Actually, I posted on climate this morning...but I prefer puppies.

We've rejiggered the website, and it may be that folks are still getting used to how to find things. Feedback welcome on the new design.

The artist's rendering sure looks an aweful lot like a modern-day lemur (though the snout may be a bit shorter). What amazes me is that so many people are so anxious to call this a missing link or even a significant find in support of the "theory" of evolution (more of a hypothesis, even per Darwin's admission...and the fossil record has done little to advance this hypothesis since Darwin first penned his hypothesis in the "Origin of Species"), when a person could just as easily make the observation that it is amazing how little lemurs have changed in 47 million years. We here every other week how new species are still being discovered and yet we are eager to assume that some random, well-preserved fossil fits into our pre-conceived notion of an evolutionary tree that we refuse to even consider that it could just be another as-of-yet undiscovered species completely unrelated to the "anthropoid primate" lineage. This is not science... this is like putting a puzzle together with a hammer...force-fitting the pieces into our preconceived view of what it should look like.

...and back to one of the earlier comments, there is a vast difference between not believing in gravity and not believing in evolution. The effects of gravity, of course, are readily observable and testable...it falls into the realm of physics...physics and mathematics are "hard sciences". To say that evolution has been established as "fact" just shows how dumbed down our school systems really are. Even many prominent (scientist) proponents of "micro" evolution have abandoned ship due to the substantial LACK of fossil evidence in support of Darwin's hypothesis. There is not just ONE "missing link"...there is insufficient evidence to suggest that a chain even exists. The fossil evidence thus far is much more in favor of what scientists term "macro" evolution, due to the apparent sudden advent of completely new species appearing on the scene at certain sediment levels, indicating as they speculate that radical changes occured during very brief periods of time, rather than gradually over eons of time. Though "Macro" evolution uses the word "evolution", it is a radically different "theory" than Darwin's, but is more in keeping with what is observed in the fossil record. Of course, there are those who would also say that since we have no evidence that species are capable of rapid, beneficial mutation (most mutation is either detrimental or is not genetically transfered to offspring) in order to adapt to dramatic environmental changes, that this is evidence of divine intervention or creation/design. Whatever your beliefs, to say that we are anywhere near being able to call evolution a "fact" is complete rubbish.

...if you think that all educated people subscribe to the form of "micro" evolution hypothesized by Darwin and taught in our public schools as gospel, read "MacroEvolution and the Fossil Record" by Steven M. Stanley from John Hopkins University. He also cites several sources of many prominent scientists. I point this out because too few people are even aware that there are serious scientists who do not subscribe to the form of evolution that has been swallowed hook, line and sinker by our schools and the mass media as though it is proven fact, when this is far from being the case.