Ida

[Bandito]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/may/19/fossil-ida-at-a-glance
http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/51498

Ths scentists, who have been working in secret for two years, have finally unveiled the results of their study.
They believe that Ida is the "missing link" between us and the rest of the livig creatures.
Ida's official name is Darvinius masillae in honour of Darwin's 200th birthday, and definate proof of his theory.
:thumbup:

There...now we have the "missing link". Now what?:)

[Bandito]

Explore Ida:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/interactive/2009/may/19/fossil-ida-evolution

[Sean]

Ida? God per her there to test our faith. Seriously while thats interesting and all, I'm assuming you mean "what now" from a proof of evolution against religions which deny it angle. Even as a layman, thats exactly what I assume a missing link to look like so its nothing big for evolutionary science really. Evolution is challenged not by lack of evidence but by circular reasoning. Anti-evolutionists only ask for evidence in the "God of the gaps" kind of way, that is, they will keep saying that there is no evidence for this until you can show a missing link between this missing link and humans, then another step between this one ad infinitum. You cannot give religions nuts enough evidence and one day they will stop because their logic is not based on evidence. Infuriating I know, but you're not going to convert anyone with this.

[Bandito]

Yes, that is true. But their "God of the gaps" space is quickly shrinking. Call me an optimist, but i think as more of these news come, the rejection of biblical "thruth" will be more and more massive.
However, I wasn't exited about proving creationists wrong. There are many ways to do so. This is a major thing in science, that's it. After the "Hobbit" debate about fossils in Indonesia(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis), here comes Ida.
:)

[Il Medico]

The bible in my opinion has noting to do with literal truth. Rather it is a collection of moral tales used to teach philosophical ideas, many of which would be acceptable to the average revlefter. The so called "bible truth" can only be explained as truth in the moral of the stories, not the stories themselves. Whether, or not these morals come from god or very wise humans is up to the individual to decide.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The bible in my opinion has noting to do with literal truth. Rather it is a collection of moral tales used to teach philosophical ideas, many of which would be acceptable to the average revlefter.

Uh, are you really sure about that?

Biblical Morality (http://creationtheory.org/Morality/BiblicalMorality.xhtml)

Of especial interest is this passage from the "Did Jesus Fix The Problem?" section:

Exactly which portions of the Old Testament were made obsolete
by Jesus? He never explained in enough detail to keep people from
arbitrarily choosing which sections they wish to obey. He said that
you should "love thy neighbour" and "do unto others
as you would have them do unto you", but even the most cursory
examination of Crusade and Inquisition history will show that it
has historically been very easy for Christians to classify
acts of hatred against other religions as a twisted form of
"love", ie- it's "for their own good".


The so called "bible truth" can only be explained as truth in the moral of the stories, not the stories themselves. Whether, or not these morals come from god or very wise humans is up to the individual to decide.Considering the twisted "morality" presented by the Bible, one would do good to completely ignore anything the Bible has to say about, well, anything.

[Bandito]

Yes, a good old joke make by God when he tested Abraham's faith by telling him to kill his son,or a father who lets his daughter being raped whole night and murdered.
The tale of Walls of Jericho really has a moral code in it. Kill everyone, their kettle, dogs and than burn the complete city down because if they don't do that, they will be living near infidels who don't believe in their God. Hundreds of examples of "pure morality writted down by very wise men".
Bullshit.
And, may I ask, why are you bringing up the question of biblical morality in a subject about a archeological finding?


in my opinionNow there's a key word.
What makes you special to detect that matter?

[apathy maybe]

"There...now we have the "missing link". Now what?"

Except that, well, what about the missing link between your great grand-father, and their great great grand mother?

What I'm trying to say is, the "missing link" idea is bollocks. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_link):
"Transitional fossils are the fossilized remains of intermediary forms of life that illustrate an evolutionary transition."

The whole point of evolution is that there is a difference between you, and your children. The missing link between you and your grand parents is, dun dun, your parents!

So yeah, we already knew this animal existed, and now we have a fossil, big deal.

As pointed out above, it isn't going to convince creationists, because they can ask for every single intermediate fossil, and they don't exist.