| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
   |
Posted - 2009.05.21 05:48:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Akita T on 21/05/2009 05:48:34
THE MISSING LINK (heh)
 Quote:
Today, at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, a revolutionary discovery -- one that will stand as a milestone for paleontologists and evolutionists everywhere -- was announced. Scientists based at the University of Oslo have discovered “Ida,” also known as Darwinius masillae, a 47-million-year-old fossil that has been proclaimed the “missing link” in connecting human skeletal structure to early mammals.
Scientists found Ida in Messel Pit, Germany and soon found out that she is about twenty times older than most fossils related to human evolution. What makes Ida so special is that despite her classification as an early prosimian (lemurs), she has certain undeniable human characteristics such as forward facing eyes and even an opposable thumb.
So... yeah 
P.S. More in-depth info...
EVE issues|Mining revamp|Build stuff|Make ISK |
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 05:58:00 -
[2]
Oh goodie. Another missing link is found. Can't get enough of those.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 06:17:00 -
[3]
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types 
EVE issues|Mining revamp|Build stuff|Make ISK |
Korodan
Minmatar
Adhocracy Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 06:21:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
You doubt the power of rationalization? This isn't going to make any creationist see sense, they'll just find a new crutch or call this "a test of faith".
But still interesting nonetheless.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 06:39:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
In what way? Sure it has some primate features but there's no real way to link any species to any other species without using DNA what with convergent evolution and all.
And how many "obvious" missing links have turned out to be frauds? All of them.
No other science is as full of obvious fraud and lies.
You know it is possible that none of our ancestors even became fossils right?
|
BlackDragonShadow
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 06:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
In what way? Sure it has some primate features but there's no real way to link any species to any other species without using DNA what with convergent evolution and all.
And how many "obvious" missing links have turned out to be frauds? All of them.
No other science is as full of obvious fraud and lies.
You know it is possible that none of our ancestors even became fossils right?
It's possible in the same degree that magical sparkle dragons could fly out of my butt and devour the world.
Also you should read up on some Darwin
Because he's theory's are only 150 years old and we've had time to improve them.
This sig was awesome but needs more EvE related content. - Mitnal
Fine. EVE Online |
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 06:57:00 -
[7]
Originally by: BlackDragonShadow
It's possible in the same degree that magical sparkle dragons could fly out of my butt and devour the world.
Don't be a jerk. You know damn well that only a statistically insignificant percent of living things end up as fossils.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 07:12:00 -
[8]
The bottom line is that the hypothesis that Darwinius is closer to anthropoids than tarsiers or omomyids does not have strong support. Even though the authors of the paper constructed a very simple cladogram they did not undertake a full, rigorous cladistic analysis to support their claims. I am baffled as to how they could stress the significance of this fossil without undertaking the requisite research to support their hypothesis.
Taken from here.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 07:13:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
In what way? Sure it has some primate features but there's no real way to link any species to any other species without using DNA what with convergent evolution and all.
In other words, you're using evolution to attempt to disprove evolution. If you're accepting evolution itself, there's no reason to reject the missing link concept.
Quote:
And how many "obvious" missing links have turned out to be frauds? All of them.
Bull****. Our common ancestry with apes is incredibly well supported.
Quote:
No other science is as full of obvious fraud and lies.
If you are referring to creationism, then yes, you are correct, except for the fact that it isn't science. It does, however, have plenty of fraud and lies, as your post demonstrates quite nicely.
Quote:
You know it is possible that none of our ancestors even became fossils right?
Except for the fact that we just found one, sure, quite possible. But probable? Not really.
-----------
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 07:29:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Mr Reeth on 21/05/2009 07:33:24
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
In other words, you're using evolution to attempt to disprove evolution. If you're accepting evolution itself, there's no reason to reject the missing link concept.
IÆm using science in an attempt to disprove bull****.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Bull****. Our common ancestry with apes is incredibly well supported.
Sure, IÆll buy that. But the hard evidence is simply not there. It always comes down to bones kind of looking alike.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
If you are referring to creationism, then yes, you are correct, except for the fact that it isn't science. It does, however, have plenty of fraud and lies, as your post demonstrates quite nicely.
Who said anything about creationism? I didnÆt. I didnÆt even hint at it. IÆm referring to the hard sciences, you know the sciences people expect proof from and donÆt crap their pants over speculation.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Except for the fact that we just found one, sure, quite possible. But probable? Not really.
The fact huh? I canÆt stand religious types like you. Every time you find a cup in the sand you run around shouting ôHOLY GRAILö and attacking anybody that points out youÆre holding a paper cup.
|
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 08:02:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Akita T on 21/05/2009 08:09:26
So... which part of "team of scientists studying it for the past two years to make sure it's not a fake and that it's relevant finally unveiling it as the discovery that it is" exactly did you miss, Mr Reeth ?
Oh, the part where "evolution must be a load of hogwash in spite of ever-increasing piles upon piles of evidence" part, was that it ?
The fact that such an old fossil of a relatively "evolved" animal has been discovered in such a good shape is the big thing you can't possibly deny.
Ok, so maybe this isn't THE missing link between humans and primitive mammals, but it is SOME never-yet-discovered link between some other things. That is yet to be determined, I suppose. The point so far was that they took pretty strong steps to make sure the fossil is authentic (as opposed to some fabricated fake). What exactly it IS, well, we have enough time to determine.
EVE issues|Mining revamp|Build stuff|Make ISK |
HankMurphy
Minmatar
Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 08:11:00 -
[12]
satan buried that missing link in the dirt to confuse us
----------
Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherf***er. |
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
Yamainu-Mirai Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 08:37:00 -
[13]
OH EM GEE.
I find this incredibly boring and irrelevant.
Apart from the fact it disproves certain... beliefs. Dunno. I just can't get excited about this.
Because at the end of all this, in the end all they can say is "yes, we evolved from this... we're relatively certain"...
It's far from discovering the root of all existance is it.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 08:44:00 -
[14]
Lets not pull a fascinating discovery into a religion vs scientific deb...
Oh screw it, too late
/exits thread.
___________________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
^Third Times a Charm^ |
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 09:42:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Akita T
So... which part of "team of scientists studying it for the past two years to make sure it's not a fake and that it's relevant finally unveiling it as the discovery that it is" exactly did you miss, Mr Reeth ?
Is Darwinius important to understanding primate evolution? Of course! It is an exceptionally preserved specimen that could do much to aid our understanding of adapid evolution and paleobiology. The grand claims about it being our ancestor, though, can not be upheld as true. The researchers simply did not do the work to support their case, and even if their language was more reserved in the technical paper they have gone hand-in-hand with the History Channel to create an aura of sensationalism around the fossil. I hardly think this is a responsible way to conduct or communicate science, flooding the media with poorly supported claims, but as reported in the New York Times some of this paper's authors care more about marketing than about good science;
"Any pop band is doing the same thing," said Jorn H. Hurum, a scientist at the University of Oslo who acquired the fossil and assembled the team of scientists that studied it. "Any athlete is doing the same thing. We have to start thinking the same way in science."
Taken form here AGAIN for those that missed the previous link.
Two years making sure itÆs real or two years marketing?
BTW, I think it was the University of Oslo that paid one million dollars for this fossil based on three pictures of it.
Originally by: Akita T
Oh, the part where "evolution must be a load of hogwash in spite of ever-increasing piles upon piles of evidence" part, was that it?
Did I say evolution was hogwash? No. ItÆs a fairly sound theory. But the evidence is not
sound. ItÆs more based on speculation than anything else, thatÆs why it is a soft science.
Originally by: Akita T
The fact that such an old fossil of a relatively "evolved" animal has been discovered in such a good shape is the big thing you can't possibly deny.
I donÆtà if itÆs real. But this line of work has been so plagued with fraudulent claims and findings can you really blame me for being skeptical every time a new ômissing linkö is found? I truly feel for the honest paleontologist who has to compete with all the hyped up frauds.
Originally by: Akita T
Ok, so maybe this isn't THE missing link between humans and primitive mammals, but it is SOME never-yet-discovered link between some other things. That is yet to be determined, I suppose. The point so far was that they took pretty strong steps to make sure the fossil is authentic (as opposed to some fabricated fake). What exactly it IS, well, we have enough time to determine.
Now youÆre starting to see reason. ThatÆs a big step, admitting that it might not be what the tabloids say it is. But what it is exactly can never be known for a fact. You canÆt know everything about an extinct species. And you canÆt even make a conclusive link to any other creature without DNA. The best this soft science can come up with is educated guesses. Many traits of any creature exist only in the meat of the creature, bones only tell you so much.
Originally by: Akita T
The whole point is that it's ONE "missing link", one in such a good shape that a lot of studies can be conducted on it.
If it turns out to not be "THE" link between humans and something else, that's somewhat regretable, but it still doesn't diminish its importance.
It canÆt be the link between humans and anything else. No scientists are even saying that.
So to sum up my arguments for the tl;dr crowd.
1)I donÆt believe everything I read.
2)Paleontology and even biology are soft sciences that should always be taken with a grain of salt.
3)Any endeavor with such a long track record of fraud for personal gain, and make no mistake these scientists have gained a lot and stand to gain a lot more, should not be trusted so quickly.
Evolution seems to have become more of a religion and much less than scientific pursuit, especially for the laity. A lot of the posters here remind me of old catholic ladies.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Blane Xero
Lets not pull a fascinating discovery into a religion vs scientific deb...
Oh screw it, too late
/exits thread.
It didn't turn into a religion vs science debate. A few people just popped in to spew some anti religious sentiments. You'll notice hate speech rarely makes a good starting point for debates.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:28:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: Blane Xero
Lets not pull a fascinating discovery into a religion vs scientific deb...
Oh screw it, too late
/exits thread.
It didn't turn into a religion vs science debate. A few people just popped in to spew some anti religious sentiments. You'll notice hate speech rarely makes a good starting point for debates.
Who pointed any fingures at you.
___________________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
^Third Times a Charm^ |
HankMurphy
Minmatar
Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:28:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
It didn't turn into a religion vs science debate. A few people just popped in to spew some anti religious sentiments. You'll notice hate speech rarely makes a good starting point for debates.
Common Sense != hate speech
----------
Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherf***er. |
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:34:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Blane Xero
Who pointed any fingures at you.
A few people did.
But I know you didn't and I didn't mean to imply that you did.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: Blane Xero
Who pointed any fingures at you.
A few people did.
But I know you didn't and I didn't mean to imply that you did.
Good. I'll be keeping my eye on you from up here 
___________________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
^Third Times a Charm^ |
|
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:37:00 -
[21]
Originally by: HankMurphy
Originally by: Mr Reeth
It didn't turn into a religion vs science debate. A few people just popped in to spew some anti religious sentiments. You'll notice hate speech rarely makes a good starting point for debates.
Common Sense != hate speech
Your own comment was mocking another persons belief system. Mockery is a type of hate speech.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 11:38:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Blane Xero
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: Blane Xero
Who pointed any fingures at you.
A few people did.
But I know you didn't and I didn't mean to imply that you did.
Good. I'll be keeping my eye on you from up here
Heh, I really should start posting with an alt. I'm gonna get my corp war decced one of these days.
|
Intense Thinker
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 12:15:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Korodan
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
You doubt the power of rationalization? This isn't going to make any creationist see sense, they'll just find a new crutch or call this "a test of faith".
But still interesting nonetheless.
It honestly isn't going to matter, according to Richard Dawkins you can find as many missing links as you want but the creationists will find whatever small hole they can and try shoehorn ID into it.
Remember, Science:
If you don't make mistakes you're doing it wrong, if you don't correct those mistakes you're doing it really wrong, if you can't admit you're mistaken you're not doing it at all
Pomp FTW!!! |
Intense Thinker
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 12:17:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: BlackDragonShadow
It's possible in the same degree that magical sparkle dragons could fly out of my butt and devour the world.
Don't be a jerk. You know damn well that only a statistically insignificant percent of living things end up as fossils.
But still a much higher percent than answered prayers which is what everyone on the other side takes as "proof" which means we win 
Pomp FTW!!! |
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 12:32:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
But still a much higher percent than answered prayers which is what everyone on the other side takes as "proof" which means we win
I don't quite get why people keep bringing religion up in this thread.
Are you that filled with hate for religious people that you just can't pass up any pretext to bash them?
|
Corwain
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 12:38:00 -
[26]
Oh the humanity.
--
Distortion| Distortion 2 Preview |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 13:48:00 -
[27]
Considering that evolution is a fluid process and how rare fossils actually are, it is quite unlikely that a whole chain of links comprising of all generations leading from one species to another will ever be found.The 'doubters' will always be screaming.
It's no use trying to reason with people that don't use reason.
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
Ratchman
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 14:30:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Korodan
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
You doubt the power of rationalization? This isn't going to make any creationist see sense, they'll just find a new crutch or call this "a test of faith".
But still interesting nonetheless.
After seeing a picture of Jesus riding a dinosaur in a Creationist colouring book, that is exactly what will happen. They don't call it blind faith for nothing.
|
ReaperOfSly
Gallente
Zetsubou Corp
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 14:31:00 -
[29]
My palm. It currently resides upon my face.
____________________
|
ReaperOfSly
Gallente
Zetsubou Corp
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 14:33:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ratchman
Originally by: Korodan
Originally by: Akita T
Well, yeah, but this is one of those "so obvious it hurts" types
You doubt the power of rationalization? This isn't going to make any creationist see sense, they'll just find a new crutch or call this "a test of faith".
But still interesting nonetheless.
After seeing a picture of Jesus riding a dinosaur in a Creationist colouring book, that is exactly what will happen. They don't call it blind faith for nothing.
Jesus riding a dinosaur? That's fantastic. 
____________________
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |