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."
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
... says it's a hoax.
Of course its a hoax. everyone knows the earth is only 6000 years old.
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. :(
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.
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.
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!
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.