ANOTHER Missing Link Found!!

[Stalk3rchief]

Oh darn, I didn't bring my fire extinguisher...

 

[Aprilgold]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

Uh...why is this needed to prove evolution? Evolution already has shitloads of evidence to support itself.

The 'hidden link' just seems like something you would shove in the face of Creationists, who would just say 'NUH-UH, GOD MADE THAT TO TEST OUR RESOLVE.' anyway. It all seems rather pointless.

It is, but so is EVERYTHING else we do to pass the time.
But yeah, as from where I sit, evolution is true in the way to where it usually takes effect when we really need it.

Like others have said, its sorta pointless, but in reality, this could be crucial information.

 

[Scabious]

Well, almost the missing link.

 

[Olrod]

This thread should be titled "ANOTHER Missing Link Found!!".

 

[RandV80]

Can anyone explain this missing link business to me; I have been trying to understand what it means exactly but I can not figure it out. Is it a genetics thing, or something entirely different? Am I dense for not understanding what people mean when they refer to it?

Honestly I think like 20+ years ago as the theory of evolution was still growing the media & popular culture made a big deal about finding the 'missing link'. So even though it hasn't been a big deal in a long time, and really probably never should have been to begin with, whenever something like this pops up people remember when it used to be talked about and bring it up like it still matters.

 

[Krat Arona]

Lies created by the Templars to make people believe we haven't been humans all along. Didn't you play Assassin's Creed Brotherhood?

 

[spartan231490]

Maybe, just pick up the story myself. I'll let you the escapist decide!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/found-mankinds-missing-link/story-e6frgcjx-1226133167039

NEW testing on prehistoric skeletons found in South Africa has found they are 2 million years old -- providing compelling evidence the discovery could be mankind's earliest known ancestor.

An international research team determined the age of the primitive human remains using uranium-lead dating and analysis of the flowstone surrounding them at the excavation site.

The age of the skeletons, named Australopithecus sediba -- meaning "natural spring" in the South African language of Sotho -- puts forward a strong case for the hominids being the missing link between man and ape.

The fossils were found in 2008 at the Malapa Cave site -- in an area known as the Cradle of Humankind, west of Johannesburg -- and were brought to the world's attention last year by Professor Paul Dirks from Australia's James Cook University in Townsville and Professor Lee Berger, from the University of Witwatersrand.

Second link and second news outlet to pick it up!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-video/8751396/The-missing-link-scientists-discover-our-earliest-ancestors.html

A nice video to go along with it.

One problem, I'm pretty sure that "man" split from apes about 6 million years ago, and we've found skeletons of direct human ancestors that are at least 3.2 million years old. This makes me somewhat dubious as to the importance of such a discovery. In fact, I'm pretty sure that we currently believe that homo sapiens evolved about 1.9 million years ago, and other members of the homo genus far earlier than that. That would mean that another member of the Australopithecus genus wouldn't be a "missing link". However, parallel evolutionary chains are still interesting.

 

[crudus]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

Also if missing links were necessary to "prove" evolution, then we would need to find all of the transition fossils for all of the species on the planet which I think is deemed "fucking impossible". I don't know why the Homo genus "needs" to find the missing links more than any other genus.

It's pretty much a miracle that humans turned out the way we did instead of just another beast.

I don't see why. Intelligence tends to go up as evolution goes on. Crows, whales(possibly), gorillas have all shown signs that they (or actually do) understand or can create their own language. Language being one of the higher signs of intelligence (in my opinion at least). We really aren't that special.

Yea, it's the earliest known ancestor until the next earliest known ancestor.

Wouldn't the first cell be the earliest known ancestor anyway?

 

[blaqknoise]

I thought they found the missing link a few years ago?

 

[TheKramers]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

I think evolution has been proven more than enough. There is million upon millions of years of evidence to support it. I think it's creationism that needs some evidence.

 

[Zero_ctrl]

Assassin's Creed planted the idea that some of those are completely made up.
Wouldn't that be interesting?

And yes, I know that AC is a work of fiction hush you.

 

[martin's a madman]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

I think evolution has been proven more than enough. There is million upon millions of years of evidence to support it. I think it's creationism that needs some evidence.

Why are you telling me this?

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

Also if missing links were necessary to "prove" evolution, then we would need to find all of the transition fossils for all of the species on the planet which I think is deemed "fucking impossible". I don't know why the Homo genus "needs" to find the missing links more than any other genus.

Same for you.


It's like people were so excited about my point that they couldn't wait to eagerly repeat it to me.

 

[Yopaz]

Won't matter - no matter how many times they find a link (and they have), creationists just retort that "you haven't found EVERY link!". It won't convince a single creationist of anything since they've already decided that evolution isn't true. It's a moving goal-post - every time scientists answer a creationist argument, they just make up a new one or move the goal post back. Creationists said there was never an instance of an organism changing due to environmental pressure. When scientists proved that bacteria could respond to selection, the creationists just moved the goal further back. Creationists said there was never a single fossil that showed a link between species - when scientists found real missing links, the creationists just retorted "nyah, nyah, you haven't found EVERY link!".

I don't care to debate with creationists anymore. At least, not the committed ones. They're brainwashed to believe whatever their pastor tells them. Few, if any, have any real backgrounds in genetics or biology. They don't know the science, yet they feel capable of criticising it. That shows the mindset they have - they're ignorant and proud of it, and they feel as if their ignorance trumps knowledge.

Until creationists actually get a proper education (and no, reading Answers in Genesis is not a proper education) or are WILLING to REALLY listen to the arguments of evolutionary biologists, there's no point in debating them. They're not listening to you, they never will.

Science is about curiousity. This wont shift what a creationist believes, but on the branch that moves to humans we might get another branch to support the hypothesis behind human evolution.

I dislike the whole deal with "The missing link" it's bullshit, there is NO missing link. That is a publicity word used to impress those who don't know about science.

 

[TheKramers]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

I think evolution has been proven more than enough. There is million upon millions of years of evidence to support it. I think it's creationism that needs some evidence.

Why are you telling me this?

Sorry, your comment made it sound like you were a creationist who was tired of people trying to prove evolution.

 

[Baneat]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

I think evolution has been proven more than enough. There is million upon millions of years of evidence to support it. I think it's creationism that needs some evidence.

Why are you telling me this?

Sorry, your comment made it sound like you were a creationist who was tired of people trying to prove evolution.

He's right though, creationists seem to require evolutionists to provide abolute proof, when nothing is ever absolute proof.

All this does is adds a tick of evidence to an overwhelmingly cogent theory. Which, although nothing is wrong with that, no number of these links will make creationists believe it.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

Uh...why is this needed to prove evolution? Evolution already has shitloads of evidence to support itself.

The 'hidden link' just seems like something you would shove in the face of Creationists, who would just say 'NUH-UH, GOD MADE THAT TO TEST OUR RESOLVE.' anyway. It all seems rather pointless.

And, of course, the logical response to that kind of claim would be...

 

[Hugga_Bear]

The funny thing about 'missing links' is that when you find one there are two more holes in the record! Yay.

Regardless, this is neat but it's not anything important. I don't doubt we'll find another skull soon or stumble on some more archaeological evidence and hey presto, new 'missing link' found. Missing link...they say that like it means something.

 

[HandsomeJack]

Not a big deal, every so often there's a new 'missing link' story. It's really blown out of proportion in terms of importance.

It's neat how old it is, but I just hope people don't start getting excited and claim this is the thing that 'proves' evolution.

Funnily enough, one of my Anthropology professors loved to follow these because she found it hillarious how worked up people would get over these...especially since we always seem to find a human skull older than whatever new "missing link" we found within a year or three.