New "Missing link" for evolution!

[jboking]

If only this would shut up creationists, but science and logic have no effect on them.

Cool that we finally found the missing link.

This is funny. You're all accepting this creature as the missing link without question. You blindly believe that it is without any proof.

Yet you criticize creationist for blindly believing the bible. Even though you are doing the exact same thing.

For fucks sake, at least let some more research be done before trumpeting this creature as the missing link. I wish people would actually have a discussion about the fossil rather than the fucking bible.

Yet another reason why we can't have nice things.

 

[Internet Kraken]

I'm not trying to start anything but like what is so big about finding just one fossil that might be a missing link, what if it was a genetically wrong member of it's species that is just horribly mutated, and yes mutations are part of evolution and if one that is so horribly mutated wanted to pass on it's genes it would have to find a similar one to mate with, and the chances of that happening aren't too high, can someone please help clear stuff up with me?

Mutations usually don't lead to large changes in a creature. Usually they either have a very small effect or no effect at all.

So a random rodent would not be born with a mutation that gave it thumbs and allowed it to walk on two legs. Mutations introduce genetic variation into a species in very minor ways. The idea is that these small changes in genetic variation and the assortment of genes through sexual reproduction leads to changes in a population. Combine this with mechanisms such as natural selection, and the result is evolution.

 

[stormcaller]

The pictures are different, look at the curve of the spine and tail along with a few others, not sure if that's important though. They might've moved it while x-raying.

My bigges thing with this whole carbon dating and probably because I'm missing something, how can you know something that is millions of years old is million of years old? Have you ever seen anything else that your 100% sure to judge it on?

Again though before the nit-pick comes in, yes believing in God requires you to accept some things that seem far-fetched but thats why it's FAITH. I find it harder and more unrealistic to belive that this was all some universal fuck-up, why hasn't there been another fuck-up since?

 

[Daveman]

Sorry but there was plenty of proof of evolution before they found this.

Macro evolution(evolution between above the level so species) and Creationism are in the same boat when it comes to teaching them for one serious reason. Neither is provable or testable.

Archaeopterix (can't remember spelling) was much more significant as it showed where reptiles evolved to birds (I presume that is what you mean by macro evolution), much better than one mammal turning to another mammal.

The thing is that evolution is really so simple there really isn't any need to proove it further. We can see it happening in bacteria and other micro-organisms. Anybody who denies it is happening might as well deny gravity exists, I mean it's equally obvious.

Macro Evolution is said to occur over eons, it is not provable. Archeopteryx is not proof of macro evolution, which is where most of the Creationism vs. Evolution arguments are set. No one is stupid enough to say that Micro Evolution doesn't occur becasue it is provable and observable. If you don't know the terms then I'm sure Wikipedia can help you out.

Wikipedia eh? Alright I'll quote them...

"The consensus of the scientific community is that the alleged micro-macro division is an artificial construct made by creationists and does not accurately reflect the actual processes of evolution."

"While details of macroevolution are continuously studied by the scientific community, the overall theory behind macroevolution (i.e. common descent) has been overwhelmingly consistent with empirical data."

So, Creationists use the term macroevolution elastically dependant on whether or not the evidence supports their argument. Surely it is obvious that a serious of evolutionary steps (or microevolution) occurs in speciation.

I don't see why people are so afraid of evolution, it poses no threat as to the existence of a god. Can't you still think of God as the creator and evolution as a tool?

I find it hard to argue for evolution because it all just seems so simple and obvious and I can't think why anyone wouldn't believe it exists. Creationism for me just presents new problems like "how did God create everything?" and of course "why?".

My bigges thing with this whole carbon dating and probably because I'm missing something, how can you know something that is millions of years old is million of years old? Have you ever seen anything else that your 100% sure to judge it on?

No, but how many countries have you been to in the world? How many can you proove actually exist in that sense? The fact is that radioactive decay is something easily proven as you can just show somebody it happening (which is a bit more difficult with evolution) but unless the natural levels of carbon-14 varied massively back then, which we have no evidence that suggests this to be the case, then we can proove it was from around that time.

Again though before the nit-pick comes in, yes believing in God requires you to accept some things that seem far-fetched but thats why it's FAITH. I find it harder and more unrealistic to belive that this was all some universal fuck-up, why hasn't there been another fuck-up since?

What fuck-up? The "big bang"? Life? Sentient life?
The thing about simplistic terms is that they're too simplistic and can't explain anything themselves.

 

[Kinguendo]

Interesting, we found a crucial piece of evidence in establishing the links between us and other species.

Instead of discussing what advances this could have in the fields of science, let's instead bash creationists. How dare they think differently.

Oh, if only you knew about the crusades? Whats that... you do? Well, this doesnt make sense... why would you be complaining about people saying relevant things about religion rather than people prancing around the world murdering people... Yeah, do I need to say more?

So every creationist is an intolerant psychopath?

Way to be ignorant.

Apparently I do need to say more, fantastic. NO! But everyone who was a part of the crusades was... I never went out of the crusades, I never said anything more about religion than that! The only thing I was saying is you are defending people whos religion has caused the deaths of so many people and what deaths have the people on this forum caused? 1... maybe at a push. And you are jumping around like a god damn monkey slinging crap at people that havent really done anything to deserve it, by the way the monkey crap thing is the best thing I have typed today (in my opinion).

 

[jboking]

Sorry but there was plenty of proof of evolution before they found this.

Macro evolution(evolution between above the level so species) and Creationism are in the same boat when it comes to teaching them for one serious reason. Neither is provable or testable.

Archaeopterix (can't remember spelling) was much more significant as it showed where reptiles evolved to birds (I presume that is what you mean by macro evolution), much better than one mammal turning to another mammal.

The thing is that evolution is really so simple there really isn't any need to proove it further. We can see it happening in bacteria and other micro-organisms. Anybody who denies it is happening might as well deny gravity exists, I mean it's equally obvious.

Macro Evolution is said to occur over eons, it is not provable. Archeopteryx is not proof of macro evolution, which is where most of the Creationism vs. Evolution arguments are set. No one is stupid enough to say that Micro Evolution doesn't occur becasue it is provable and observable. If you don't know the terms then I'm sure Wikipedia can help you out.

Err, let's not use bad examples to convince creationists, eh? Archaeopteryx, or however the hell you spell that bloody thing, was as much of a fraud as Nebraska Man.

Which is precisely why I said that^(see above in bold). Thank you for the support I suppose.

But if microevolution exists then macroevolution exists since macroevolution is just microevolution after microevolution after microevolution.... ad infinitum.

There seems to be some confusion. That is not at all what Macro evolution is. No matter how much evolution occurs inside of your species, there is no guarantee that it will ever leave your species. After all, micro evolution can be something as simple as a slight change in the pigmentation of skin in newborns over time. It doesn't lead to Kingdom, phylum, or class changes as Macro evolution would.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Wow, as of writing there's 13 posts and it's already religious.

Anyway, good. I really hope it's legitimate because it'd be a huge plus for science.

(See, that was a more subtle dig at religion.)

Religion is subtle to me, they yell in the city centre about how I am going to hell... ME... ME! Dont go pointing your fingers at me and blaming my life style for all the things that are wrong with the world, bloody hate-mongers... and yes they do monger hate... my hatred of them for their bloody shenanigans.

I can't stand religion - I see it as unnecessary and pointless. Others can take it how they want but I do object people trying to force their views on others - more specifically me.

I've never understood why they yell at me (us) about going to hell. For one I don't believe in it so its already ruled out. And two, by shouting at people are they going to get themselves into their heaven? Probably not. SO WHY DO IT?

Agreed, whole-heartedly.

Way to be ignorant. The idea that every religious person wants to convert you is ridiculous. In my entire life their was only one time someone tried to convert me. They asked if I was familiar with the teachings of god. I said I'm not a very religious person and I would prefer to stay that way, and then they left me alone.

What's funny is that the people I find to be intolerant are you. The idiots who think they are smarter than others because of religion. You complain about them trying to force you into religion, yet you do the same thing by forcing the idea of evolution upon them.

Don't be a hypocrite.

 

[Kinguendo]

Oh, if only you knew about the crusades? Whats that... you do? Well, this doesnt make sense... why would you be complaining about people saying relevant things about religion rather than people prancing around the world murdering people... Yeah, do I need to say more?

Did you lose family in the Crusades? I know that healing takes a long time. I just wanted to apologize for my part in the Crusades and I hope that the healing can begin. By the way, you are going to apologize for the actions of Carol Watts, Jeffery Dahmer, et all right?

Where did I even hint at being pissed off at the crusades and still holding a grudge? Also I never asked for an apology, and who? Who are these people? What connection do they have to me? Also, what did et do?

 

[pffh]

Sorry but there was plenty of proof of evolution before they found this.

Macro evolution(evolution between above the level so species) and Creationism are in the same boat when it comes to teaching them for one serious reason. Neither is provable or testable.

Archaeopterix (can't remember spelling) was much more significant as it showed where reptiles evolved to birds (I presume that is what you mean by macro evolution), much better than one mammal turning to another mammal.

The thing is that evolution is really so simple there really isn't any need to proove it further. We can see it happening in bacteria and other micro-organisms. Anybody who denies it is happening might as well deny gravity exists, I mean it's equally obvious.

Macro Evolution is said to occur over eons, it is not provable. Archeopteryx is not proof of macro evolution, which is where most of the Creationism vs. Evolution arguments are set. No one is stupid enough to say that Micro Evolution doesn't occur becasue it is provable and observable. If you don't know the terms then I'm sure Wikipedia can help you out.

Err, let's not use bad examples to convince creationists, eh? Archaeopteryx, or however the hell you spell that bloody thing, was as much of a fraud as Nebraska Man.

Which is precisely why I said that^(see above in bold). Thank you for the support I suppose.

But if microevolution exists then macroevolution exists since macroevolution is just microevolution after microevolution after microevolution.... ad infinitum.

There seems to be some confusion. That is not at all what Macro evolution is. No matter how much evolution occurs inside of your species, there is no guarantee that it will ever leave your species. After all, micro evolution can be something as simple as a slight change in the pigmentation of skin in newborns over time. It doesn't lead to Kingdom, phylum, or class changes as Macro evolution would.

Actually no offense but the confusion is on your side of the table macroevolution is thought of as the compounded effects of microevolution and the distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is only the difference of the time and scale between the two.

 

[Iconsting]

New species are being found all the time, all of these "missing links" will be discovered eventually.

 

[shootthebandit]

The pictures are different, look at the curve of the spine and tail along with a few others, not sure if that's important though. They might've moved it while x-raying.

My bigges thing with this whole carbon dating and probably because I'm missing something, how can you know something that is millions of years old is million of years old? Have you ever seen anything else that your 100% sure to judge it on?

Again though before the nit-pick comes in, yes believing in God requires you to accept some things that seem far-fetched but thats why it's FAITH. I find it harder and more unrealistic to belive that this was all some universal fuck-up, why hasn't there been another fuck-up since?

carbon dating is a very accurate process, as EVERY life form is a carbon based being, it emitts radition in the form of carbon-13 (an isotope of carbon 12) this radation halfs over a certain time frame (known as its half-life), it keeps halving but never reaches zero. they just measure the carbon-13 being produced, compare it with the half-life of carbon-13 and you can tell old the fossil is. they can use it for lots of things.

i hope this helps, not the easiest thing to explain.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

they found a monkey. yay.
until evolution has been 100% proven, I'll choose to believe in creation.

Evolution is already accepted as proven. This has nothing to do with proving evolution. We do have *other* fossils of common ancestors. This specimen is just the closest link between primates and other mammals.

It's not like the theory of evolution hinged on this discovery... it's "just" a potentially useful piece of paleontology: A little more information about our common ancestors.

 

[ShadowStar42]

That would make you a very poor storyteller, and would make people doubt your story. If you missed out 'the big frikken dinosaur' to quote the late great Bill Hicks what else did you neglect to mention. Does God object to red roses?, Does he like fish?, Did the unicorn and dragon turn up late for the ark and thats why they dont exist any more? Are rabbits dangerous? What arent you telling us!!! ;D

As the first dinosaurs weren't recognized until the 1600s I don't think that really relates to the story told round about 2000 BCE. When a 3 year old asks me where babies come from I also don't tell them about doggy style, AIDS, and downs syndrome.

 

[Kinguendo]

Wow, as of writing there's 13 posts and it's already religious.

Anyway, good. I really hope it's legitimate because it'd be a huge plus for science.

(See, that was a more subtle dig at religion.)

Religion is subtle to me, they yell in the city centre about how I am going to hell... ME... ME! Dont go pointing your fingers at me and blaming my life style for all the things that are wrong with the world, bloody hate-mongers... and yes they do monger hate... my hatred of them for their bloody shenanigans.

I can't stand religion - I see it as unnecessary and pointless. Others can take it how they want but I do object people trying to force their views on others - more specifically me.

I've never understood why they yell at me (us) about going to hell. For one I don't believe in it so its already ruled out. And two, by shouting at people are they going to get themselves into their heaven? Probably not. SO WHY DO IT?

Agreed, whole-heartedly.

Way to be ignorant. The idea that every religious person wants to convert you is ridiculous. In my entire life their was only one time someone tried to convert me. They asked if I was familiar with the teachings of god. I said I'm not a very religious person and I would prefer to stay that way, and then they left me alone.

What's funny is that the people I find to be intolerant are you. The idiots who think they are smarter than others because of religion. You complain about them trying to force you into religion, yet you do the same thing by forcing the idea of evolution upon them.

Don't be a hypocrite.

I thought I should give you a second chance but now I just think you are stupid, do you even know what hypocrisy and ignorance are? We never said every religious person wants to convert us, we said that the ones that have tried annoy us. Also, we never forced our opinions of evolution on anyone... who? Come on, who? You clearly thought that we had other wise you wouldnt just take an uninformed shot in the dark like that because that would make you an idiot... or would you?

 

[Internet Kraken]

Interesting, we found a crucial piece of evidence in establishing the links between us and other species.

Instead of discussing what advances this could have in the fields of science, let's instead bash creationists. How dare they think differently.

Oh, if only you knew about the crusades? Whats that... you do? Well, this doesnt make sense... why would you be complaining about people saying relevant things about religion rather than people prancing around the world murdering people... Yeah, do I need to say more?

So every creationist is an intolerant psychopath?

Way to be ignorant.

Apparently I do need to say more, fantastic. NO! But everyone who was a part of the crusades was... I never went out of the crusades, I never said anything more about religion than that! The only thing I was saying is you are defending people whos religion has caused the deaths of so many people and what deaths have the people on this forum caused? 1... maybe at a push. And you are jumping around like a god damn monkey slinging crap at people that havent really done anything to deserve it, by the way the monkey crap thing is the best thing I have typed today (in my opinion).

Modern society has advanced, religion included. So I don't go around blaming Christians for the crusades. Mainly due to the fact that the modern Christians where not in the fucking crusades.

This would be like me judging Germans based on the actions of the Nazis.

 

[PersianLlama]

they found a monkey. yay.
until evolution has been 100% proven, I'll choose to believe in creation.

Yeah good call bro! So much more evidence for that.

You don't have to believe it, but I think it's alot more logical to think that someone created the Earth and us then the idea that once upon a time there was nothing, which exploded and made monkeys which apparently decided to be the only species that wanted to evolve enough to become intelligent.

...Um, you're saying something poofed everything. And you have quite the misconception about evolution, life and the big bang there.

 

[master m99]

hey mabie creationist will stfu... then again

 

[Daveman]

After all, micro evolution can be something as simple as a slight change in the pigmentation of skin in newborns over time. It doesn't lead to Kingdom, phylum, or class changes as Macro evolution would.

But it all starts out with small changes at the beginning and each separate tiny change has its own tiny branches which we then classify under these names, it's the tree of life. Also, technically we don't use the KPCOFGS system for classification any more. There are quite a lot more options, allowing for tiny changes in each. Also, I can't see any other why of explaining why there weren't any of animal x for millions of years and then suddenly there was.

 

[ShadowStar42]

Where did I even hint at being pissed off at the crusades and still holding a grudge? Also I never asked for an apology, and who? Who are these people? What connection do they have to me? Also, what did et do?

Saying that Christians have no right to talk about atheist actions because of the actions of other Christians implies our ownership of those actions. These people are atheists who have committed horrible atrocities who I'm sure you have no more connection to than I do to any crusader. The point I'm making is that its pretty foolish to bring up the Crusades in a religious discussion in the modern age.