Duh, Darwinius ‘Discovery’ Dudes. The Science Has Already BEEN Settled
I really don’t know why you didn’t realize that the time for debate is over and instead insisted upon humiliating yourselves with “An Inconvenient Truth” type of documentary about your Missing Link “discovery”.
Ida, the fossil hailed as ancestor of man, ‘wasn’t even a close relative
IT WAS billed as one of the most important fossil finds in history, a “missing link” that would challenge everything we knew about human evolution.
Darwinius masillae, the primitive primate that was unveiled to the world with huge fanfare and a Sir David Attenborough documentary in May, seems now to have been less of a missing link than an evolutionary dead end. Far from being an ancestor to humans, the lemur-like creature from 47 million years ago belongs to an entirely different branch of the primate family tree that has left no known descendants, research has indicated…. [full article here]
I understand you need to do something to justify all your grants and stuff, but come on. I’m no paleontologist, but even I know that the missing link has already been discovered. Exhibit A:
Courtesy of http://www.moonbattery.com
Exhibit B.
Don’t take my word for it — just ask him yourself. He still remembers, and speaks fondly of, the primordial ooze from whence he came.
Jenny
Lori Ziganto
somegit
Snark And Boobs 
***Darwinius masillae, the primitive primate that was unveiled to the world with huge fanfare and a Sir David Attenborough documentary in May, seems now to have been less of a missing link than an evolutionary dead end.***
They’re all dead ends. And now that you mention it, I think homo sapiens is a dead end.
And, BTW, the Dodgers could have used Larry in the 3 hole.
hey. not sure I understand the point you were trying to make in this blog…
Hey.. not everything has a point. Sometimes, things are just joking around. In this case, I was making fun of the “oh we found the missing link!! ZOMG!!!11111” hoopla even though it’s not even a close “relative” to humans at all. Made me giggle.
Also poking fun at Larry King. Because, you know, he’s REALLY, REALLY OLD.
Hey. Just checking here… you do at least accept that evolution happened (and is still happening), right? (if you don’t, there are numerous resources on the topic, for example, talkorigins.org) Are you opposed to hype? But isn’t that what our capitalist economy is based on? Do you see where I’m coming from? (and yes. you are correct. Larry King is old. observational humor at its finest… thanks…)
Anyone remember Bram Stoker’s Dracula?
I don’t know why that came to mind. Must be because it’s close to halloween…
Hee hee. I thought the point was pretty clear. Well done. I wrote a poem in honor of all the hoopla over Ida when they first unveiled her.
There once was a fossil named “Ida.”
If asked to climb a tree, she mighta.
She had opposable thumbs
and nails just like some
of the primates that sat right beside her.
Now Ida´s raising a stink.
‘Cuz she fell in a lake and did sink.
“Science” insists
Evolution exists
So they call her the new “Missing Link.”
Cheers.
Evolution is not happening. Natural selection is what is happening.
A popular scientific theory of the past, spontaneous generation, was finally scientifically disproved by Louis Pastuer in the 19th century. Alas, that is now what evolutionist want to believe again, almost religiously, in my opinion.
Interstingly, there is more than one theory on evolution yet they want to teach it as fact. Well, once there is a unified theory and they can create a simple life form in the lab, I may listen. But I know a bit about how a single cell organism works, so I really don’t even see that happening.
And please, if any are so inclined, do not label me a creationist. I know the earth and all life was not created in 144 hours. The Bible does is not specific about that as the Hebrew word translated day is not restricted to 24 hours. I also know that while Bible is not a science book, when it touches on things scientific, it was thousands of years ahead of it’s time.
Nice verse Mike. 🙂
excuse me… I realize I’m a bit late in posting this. I’m as opposed to journalistic sensationalism as the next person… I just find it difficult to believe that any of you think you know more about this area than the people studying it (which is what seems to be the case, at least with some, if not all commenters). I’d just recommend a greater eagerness to listen than to be dismissive… thanks…
for example, here’s a quite informative video on the topic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri20shBEsls (and this was recorded in May!)
A few additional basic points: natural selection *is* evolution. Evolution is any change in “the frequency of alleles.” Small changes can accumulate over time into much larger changes. [blahblahblah…] Again, I’m sure that if you tried to understand the current research and theory in this area, you might be less reflexively dismissive of it…