Slashdot Mirror


Ancient Fossil Offers Clues To Primate Evolution

langelgjm sends in an update to a story we discussed over the weekend about an extremely well-preserved fossil of an ancient primate, Darwinius masillae, that sheds light on an important area of evolution. The 47 million-year-old specimen has now been officially unveiled, and while many media outlets are stumbling over themselves with phrases like "missing link" and "holy grail," it's clearly a very impressive find. "Discovered two years ago, the exquisitely preserved specimen is not a direct ancestor of monkeys and humans, but hints at what such an ancestor might have looked like. According to researchers, 'The specimen has an unusual history: it was privately collected and sold in two parts, with only the lesser part previously known. The second part, which has just come to light, shows the skeleton to be the most complete primate known in the fossil record.' The scientific article describing the find was published yesterday in the peer-reviewed, open-access journal PLoS ONE. Google's home page is also celebrating the find with a unique image." Science blogger Brian Switek offers some criticism of the academic paper and the media swarm, saying, "I would have hoped that this fossil would receive the care and attention it deserves, but for now it looks like a cash cow for the History Channel. Indeed, this association may not have only presented overblown claims to the public, but hindered good science, as well."

24 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. I got 10 bucks here ... by Nursie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... says it's a hoax. Any takers?

    Actually, even if not, the circumstances are now rather dubious. Hopefully it hasn't been damaged in the course of it being sold in two parts and shipped around in private hands.

    1. Re:I got 10 bucks here ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... says it's a hoax.

      Of course its a hoax. everyone knows the earth is only 6000 years old.

    2. Re:I got 10 bucks here ... by Talderas · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... says it's a hoax. Any takers?

      It's a pseudo-hoax. I'm sure the citizens of Magrathea are quite pleased that we're stumbling upon the little details they left.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    3. Re:I got 10 bucks here ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Would you stop this Christianity bashing already? We admit it, it was a mistake, the earth is older than 6000 years. It's just that very few of us are capable of counting any higher. :(

    4. Re:I got 10 bucks here ... by Alt_Cognito · · Score: 5, Informative

      This was studied for two years before it was released, so it seems that they've done some due diligence to make sure this was NOT a hoax.

      X-rays were taken taken of the internal structures (which are allegedly impossible to fake) and they proved out to be authentic.

    5. Re:I got 10 bucks here ... by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Funny

      No way, Google changed their logo for this! It *has* to be real!

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
  2. Meanwhile over in Congress by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it rather scary that while scientists are getting excited over this 47 million year old fossil that there are fossils in Congress who will swear on a stack of Bibles that the earth is only 6000 years old and that evolution is bunk.

    That people can get elected without having basic modern ape like intelligence is the scary bit, this primate was probably more self-aware than many of those elected officials.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by TheHerk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, but while that is pretty scary, what is more scary are the millions of people that vote for them.

      --
      -Blind faith runs into things.
    2. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by halivar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And scariest of all? The world still turns, and objective reality refuses to accept that proper science is vital to hold the fabric of space-time together.

      Honestly, the only reason anyone ought to care what a politician thinks about creationism is if they decide what's taught in public schools. This is almost always a state matter. Your U.S. Congressman has bunk to do with it.

      And if it really, REALLY troubles you that some congressmen are anti-science, I suggest you give equal time to folks like Dennis Kucinich; after all, is seeing UFO's somehow more scientifically acceptable that an ID-proponent?

    3. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isn't it rather scary that while scientists are getting excited over this 47 million year old fossil that there are fossils in Congress who will swear on a stack of Bibles that the earth is only 6000 years old and that evolution is bunk.

      C'mon now, slashdot always has these remarks, but you know what? NBC nightly news reported this find last night - the epitome of mainstream - and there was no mention of the Bible or controversy over the validity of evolution, none at all. Just excitement over a great find that may fill in the picture of evolution a bit more. At some point, decrying all this supposed scientific opposition which is really just a small fringe, becomes self-pity, or a persecution complex.

    4. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by linzeal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would rather more people take responsibility for their own morality than depend upon some transcendental source like a god.

    5. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by mdwh2 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I find it more frightening that most of our leaders and most of the population in general have all bought into the idea that morality is just convention

      And here we uncover the fossil known as Straw Man.

      and that there is no higher power to answer to.

      So? There is no evidence that there is. And if there is, there is no way we could know what "morality" he expects us to behave by. There is no reason that his standard of morality should match up with what we consider to be ethical.

      And above all, I find it worrying that people only behave ethically out of fear of having to answer to some "higher power".

    6. Re:Meanwhile over in Congress by DriedClexler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Honestly, the only reason anyone ought to care what a politician thinks about creationism is if they decide what's taught in public schools. This is almost always a state matter. Your U.S. Congressman has bunk to do with it.

      Ah, yes, thanks for reminding us about the theory of federalism, on which our governing system is ostensibly based.

      Now I'm going to explain to you how it works in the real world.

      In the real world, the national government has become intimately involved in decisions at the state and local level, well beyond its enumerated powers. If nothing else, federal funding of local education has enabled it to threaten states with, "Don't want to do what we tell you? Then kiss your funding goodbye."

      Yes, the federal government does have significant control over what can be taught in public schools. Why do you think the Supreme Court ever rules on cirriculum issues? Why don't federal judges respond to all such lawsuits that make it to their level by saying, "Meh, state matter, go away"?

      So please don't act like Congressmen are powerless over what's taught in public schools.

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
  3. Media event by olclops · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is more of a media event than a true major discovery. All orchestrated by the History Channel.

    See this article.

  4. Igniting a non-existant debate? by Poobar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interesting New Scientist blog: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/05/is-ida-a-pop-star-fossil-or-po.html They seem to make two main points- firstly that the whole thing is degenerating into hype, but more interestingly that there wasn't a big debate here anyway. Yes, it's a missing link, but it's one that all rational people knew must have existed somewhere. It hasn't ignited debate between creationists and evolutionists, for the reason that they don't really debate each other anymore- at least not in scientific circles.

  5. No way by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Funny
    but for now it looks like a cash cow for the History Channel

    Not a chance. They'd have to reduce the Hitler coverage to do that.

    rj

    1. Re:No way by spun · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't be dissing on the Hitler Channel. Those who are ignorant of Hitler are doomed to use him in Internet arguments.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  6. Uh, she wasn't found two years ago by macsuibhne · · Score: 4, Informative

    She was found in 1983 by an anonymous collector. She was sold to the University of Oslo two years ago.

    Tony.

    --
    -- "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" -- Juvenal
  7. Re:Evolution is real -- even for modern man. by McDutchie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Correlation is not causation. Just because different "racial" groups statistically have different levels of "intelligence" (a culturally defined and therefore biased concept) doesn't mean that race has anything to do with it. The assumption that this difference is caused by "racial"/genetic factors, without offering any evidence to support that assumption, is invalid and may be considered racist.

    The history of humanity suggests that culture is the overriding causal factor. Asians and Europeans are just as capable as Africans (or any other "race") of having a primitive, oppressive and destructive culture, as has been well established through the ages. For example, we saw the same abject poverty in Europe during the Middle Ages, for cultural reasons that are well known. Also, contrary to popular prejudice, there are African countries that are doing pretty well.

  8. Re:Give it a rest by camperdave · · Score: 5, Funny

    That reminds me of the museum guide who, when asked how old the T-Rex fossil was, replied: "6.5 million and three years, and 6 months old".

    "That's amazing", said the tourist, "How do you know the age so exactly?"
    "Well, that's easy", replied the guide. "It was 6.5 million years old when I started working here, and that was three and a half years ago."

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  9. WTF? by wall0159 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's just think for a moment about which branches of science contradict creationism:
    biology
    biochemistry
    genetics
    physics
    astronomy
    astrophysics

    I'm sure there are other _genres_ of science too. Are you really saying that it doesn't matter if a leader of society believes that all the scientists working in these fields are wrong?

    Believing in creationism is like believing the earth is flat, and would have huge consequences in many many public policy areas.

    1. Re:WTF? by ArcherB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's just think for a moment about which branches of science contradict creationism:
      biology
      biochemistry
      genetics
      physics
      astronomy
      astrophysics

      I'm sure there are other _genres_ of science too. Are you really saying that it doesn't matter if a leader of society believes that all the scientists working in these fields are wrong?

      Believing in creationism is like believing the earth is flat, and would have huge consequences in many many public policy areas.

      I'll just take the last three, physics, astronomy, and astrophysics, and use one example to prove you wrong. Now, go read up on THIS GUY who used all three of these to support the idea that God created the universe.

      Now, don't get me wrong, I find flat eathers and young earth creationists just as annoying as you do, so please don't lump all "creationists" together. Many are brilliant scientists who present valid cases for differing levels of creationism based on actual science, much like the example I listed above.

      Religion and science are NOT mutually exclusive.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  10. Re:Gand*N+1 Aunt? by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Admit it, you're just pretending to be from Alabama. It's obvious.

    If you were for real, you wouldn't be able to read.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  11. Re:Give it a rest by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    How the fuck do you know, asshole, were you there?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."