|
Feast your eyes on what a group of scientists call the Holy Grail of human evolution. A team of researchers Tuesday unveiled an almost perfectly intact fossil of a 47 million-year-old primate they say represents the long-sought missing link between humans and apes. Officially known as Darwinius masillae, the fossil of the lemur-like creature dubbed Ida shows it had opposable thumbs like humans and fingernails instead of claws. Scientists say the cat-sized animal's hind legs offer evidence of evolutionary changes that led to primates standing upright - a breakthrough that could finally confirm Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. "This specimen is like finding the Lost Ark for archeologists," lead scientist Jorn Hurum said at a ceremony at the American Museum of Natural History. "It is the scientific equivalent of the Holy Grail. This fossil will probably be the one that will be pictured in all textbooks for the next 100 years." A team of amateur fossil hunters discovered the near-perfect remains inside a mile-wide crater outside of Frankfurt in 1983. Experts believe the pit was a volcanic caldera where scores of animals from the Eocene epoch were killed and their remains were kept remarkably well-preserved. Though the pit has been a bountiful source of other fossils, the inexperienced archeologists didn't realize the value of their find. Years later, the University of Oslo bought the 95%-intact fossil, and Hurum studied it in secret for two years. His colleague, Jens Franzen, hailed the discovery as "the eighth wonder of the world." "We're not dealing with our grand, grand, grandmother, but perhaps with our grand, grand, grand aunt," Franzen said. The unveiling of the fossil came as part of a carefully-orchestrated publicity campaign unusual for scientific discoveries. A History Channel film on the discovery will air next week. A book release and a slew of other documentaries will follow.
Click.
This is awesome news, creationists can finally go fuck themselves. Google even changed their logo :D
|
|
|
The unveiling of the fossil came as part of a carefully-orchestrated publicity campaign unusual for scientific discoveries.
This, to me, is almost as interesting as the find.
The scientific community has never been good at marketing, while religions often excel at it (Scientology & Christianity are particularly good).
In the last few years all I've personally seen is some soundbites in the fields of astronomy and genetics. "The Gay Gene", "The Genius Gene" etc that are easy for media to pick up on and people to talk about without needing to understand any of the underlying theory. I'm just really curious in general how the marketing of science will continue to evolve over time. After all, funding often is granted or denied by public perception (see Stem Cell research) based on popularity or lack thereof among taxpayers. So this is a more serious question than a nerdy scientist enjoying his 20 minutes of public fame.
|
I don't really get how this is a 'missing link' which is a weazel word, since it's 47 milion years old and found in Germany.
It's a 'missing link' between mammals and primates? Just goes to show you that one can't even point inbetween which fossil a missing link has to be found.
This is awesome news, creationists can finally go fuck themselves.
This is going to give them way less problems then Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Homo Egaster, Homo rufolfensis, Homo georgicus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalis, Homo floresiensis. All clearly not quite homo sapiens but all clearly humans.
And then a whole bunch of creatures that weren't quite human but are either ape-like humans or human-like apes, depening on how you look at it. Like Australopithecus and all those others.
Creationists just ignore that. How is this monkey fossil going to change this?
I only worry that all this dishonest hype will make people indifferent to scientists. There are already tons of people that don't trust them. Now they actually have a reason? How is this the holy grail? What about a ape fossil found in Africa that lives 8 to 6 mya and that looks like Australopithecus but is much older? How about the oldest human fossil found that has full cranium capacity? Say like 1.5 myo? But still not quite fully morphologically human?
|
konadora
Singapore66364 Posts
I accidentally read
Officially known as Darwinius masillae, the fossil of the lemur-like creature dubbed Ida shows it had opposable thumbs like humans and fingernails instead of claws.
as Idra.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
|
Well Thank You for that education post, now I can finally call my cousin an ape. LOL
|
a breakthrough that could finally confirm Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
Its already been confirmed many times over, the only people who still deny it are uneducated and/or religious fundamentalists.
This won't change anything except being one more case against the "show us evolution happening argument"
|
On May 20 2009 19:47 nvnplatypus wrote:Show nested quote +The unveiling of the fossil came as part of a carefully-orchestrated publicity campaign unusual for scientific discoveries. This, to me, is almost as interesting as the find. The scientific community has never been good at marketing, while religions often excel at it (Scientology & Christianity are particularly good). In the last few years all I've personally seen is some soundbites in the fields of astronomy and genetics. "The Gay Gene", "The Genius Gene" etc that are easy for media to pick up on and people to talk about without needing to understand any of the underlying theory. I'm just really curious in general how the marketing of science will continue to evolve over time. After all, funding often is granted or denied by public perception (see Stem Cell research) based on popularity or lack thereof among taxpayers. So this is a more serious question than a nerdy scientist enjoying his 20 minutes of public fame.
What are you talking about? Have you missed 'Global Warming'?
Science has been elevated to a religion. People need to take their ideologies out of science, but good luck with that.
Anyways, I'm intrigued where this leads to, but to say science doesn't market well is wrong.
PS: Let's not forget the Hydroncollider (sp?).
|
@OP.
This doesn't fuck over creationists, just sorta gives young-earth creationists a rough time. This doesn't actually do much to dissuade creationists.
|
On May 20 2009 20:02 404.Nintu wrote:
@OP.
This doesn't fuck over creationists, just sorta gives young-earth creationists a rough time. This doesn't actually do much to dissuade creationists.
Evolution is not against Religion. I don't know why some people relate it to that, but I guess that has to do with the hardcore fundamentals. Most christians acknowledge evolution, however, evolution in no way shape or form can disprove 'God', nor can science, because face it, there are things we will never understand, and even by understanding the laws of the universe / nature, it still doesn't mean that god didn't create those laws.
Saying this though, I lean more agnostic. Doesn't matter if he exists or not, but you can't disprove or prove it's existence.
|
On May 20 2009 20:07 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2009 20:02 404.Nintu wrote:
@OP.
This doesn't fuck over creationists, just sorta gives young-earth creationists a rough time. This doesn't actually do much to dissuade creationists. Evolution is not against Religion. I don't know why some people relate it to that, but I guess that has to do with the hardcore fundamentals. Most christians acknowledge evolution, however, evolution in no way shape or form can disprove 'God', nor can science, because face it, there are things we will never understand, and even by understanding the laws of the universe / nature, it still doesn't mean that god didn't create those laws. Saying this though, I lean more agnostic. Doesn't matter if he exists or not, but you can't disprove or prove it's existence.
Sure, it doesn't disprove God, but it does disprove a lot of what those books that tell us God exists also tell us about how we came to be.
|
On May 20 2009 20:16 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2009 20:07 Aegraen wrote:On May 20 2009 20:02 404.Nintu wrote:
@OP.
This doesn't fuck over creationists, just sorta gives young-earth creationists a rough time. This doesn't actually do much to dissuade creationists. Evolution is not against Religion. I don't know why some people relate it to that, but I guess that has to do with the hardcore fundamentals. Most christians acknowledge evolution, however, evolution in no way shape or form can disprove 'God', nor can science, because face it, there are things we will never understand, and even by understanding the laws of the universe / nature, it still doesn't mean that god didn't create those laws. Saying this though, I lean more agnostic. Doesn't matter if he exists or not, but you can't disprove or prove it's existence. Sure, it doesn't disprove God, but it does disprove a lot of what those books that tell us God exists also tell us about how we came to be.
Young earth creationists have already had enough evidence to sorta screw that whole party. This link isn't really going to change a whole lot.
afaik, most Christians don't believe in YE creationism.
|
|
|
Awesome, science going for more publicity is always healthy.
|
Awesome, tx for posting this. 
|
No such thing as a missing link in human evolution, its too gradual.
|
Why was this the missing link? What does this fossil show that we didn't know before?
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
"Cat-sized", "Lemur-like", "the animal's hind legs offer evidence of evolutionary changes that led to primates standing upright" -- how exactly is that a link between humans and apes? I thought that apes too can walk upright and have an opposing thumb, don't they?
|
apes aren't habitual bipeds, thats why they are apes and not hominids. Bipedalism arose first, then larger brains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/05/20/alg_fossil_1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.google.pl/logos/missinglink.gif)
