Slashdot Mirror
New Dinosaur Species Is a Missing Link
An anonymous reader writes "A new dinosaur provides a link between what paleontologists consider 'early' and 'later' dinosaurs. There's a gap in the fossil record between the oldest known dinosaurs, which walked or ran on their hind legs about 230 million years ago in Argentina and Brazil, and other predatory dinosaurs that lived much later. Daemonosaurus chauliodus helps fill in a blank in dinosaur history."
In the ongoing "discussion" with the creationists, it has occasionally been pointed out that whenever a biologist finds a fossil that fills in a gap in the fossil record, one result is to replace the one gap with two gaps. Thus, no such discovery can ever persuade the creationists; it just adds to their list of known gaps in the fossil record To them, evolutionary theory can't be ready for prime time until all the fossil gaps are filled in. They don't acknowledge the patterns that biologists find in the (admittedly very sketchy) fossil record.
Actually, they just want a fossil that we can point to and say, "This species evolved into that species." For example we keep finding primate fossils that are very close relatives to man. Unfortunately, we have never found a fossil that is a direct ancestor of man. All we can say is that man and whatever fossil shared a common ancestor. Well, no kidding! All animals share a common ancestor, even if was microscopic and swam in some muddy pool. For that matter, we have not found a fossil or even a species that is a direct ancestor to any other species.
That is my problem with evolution. That's not to say I don't believe evolution. I just get really offended when someone tells me I can bring up questions about it. I also get offended when people say that I don't believe evolution because of religion. Yes, I'm a Christian, but my faith is in no way threatened by evolution.
And there is the ol' 404 error, but that's a link for another /. story.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
ok, i'm only going to do this once, but i have to ask:
In the grand scheme of your daily life, and continued existence on this planet, how has the knowledge that humans evolved from monkeys, and so on and so forth down to single celled whatnot, been an important factor in your continued success as a person? have you ever gotten a raise for believing this? have you ever gained any windfall from this being what you believe?
Right, I'm willing to bet, the answer to that is no. Now, sure, a person could argue a lot of philosophical things about believing in God, vs believing in Evolution, but when it all boils down, what you believe about the origins of mankind, the world, and the universe, has little bearing on what kind of life you are going to have. As long as you are taught to not act like a cockbite, and be somewhat civilized, your going to be fine, religion be damned.
Sure, some groups may not accept what you think, but others will, and that pretty much sums up human existence.
Sure, it may be ignorance, but I can be ignorant about a lot of things, and live a perfectly healthy and normal life. I'm ignorant of the precise internal workings of a hybrid electric automobile, as well as how the exact details of how the north-bridge in a computer works. I'm also ignorant of the exact details of the rise and fall of the Byzantine empire, but not knowing these things does not prevent me from having a decent life, and refusing to learn them only precludes me from working in a few very specialized fields of work. This whole blood feud between religion and science is pretty pointless when it comes down to the day to day lives of most of us, and I'm starting to get tired of it.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
So you don't provide any guidance in the education of your children? You let the schools do it all yourself? You can't logically educate your child regarding your own beliefs and let them decide which way they want to go?
I am a creationist, I studied Biology at University and I am still a creationist. My kids will be taught evolution, and I have taught them my beliefs. I won't force either point of view on them - at some point they will make up their own mind. But at least they will be educated regarding both point of views. I don't think, or claim, that Evolutionists are "idiots" - I don't need to resort to name calling to try and discount the other point of view.
Having a child taught something at school is not "through the backdoor" - you're aware of it, you are ultimately responsible for your child - so don't blame their school for your inability to argue your point of view.
dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
How far back do you want to go?
It's rather irrelevant, anyway. Let me rephrase your complaint:
"You've shown me two of your cousins, five of your brothers, three of your sisters, two uncles, and a niece. But you can't show me your mother or father, so clearly you were miracled into existence."
Yep. Makes perfect sense.
Congratulations! You have effectively argued against my example. Now, how about you take a whack at my point.
Let me keep you from having to scroll up:
Actually, they just want a fossil that we can point to and say, "This species evolved into that species." For example we keep finding primate fossils that are very close relatives to man. Unfortunately, we have never found a fossil that is a direct ancestor of man. All we can say is that man and whatever fossil shared a common ancestor. Well, no kidding! All animals share a common ancestor, even if was microscopic and swam in some muddy pool. For that matter, we have not found a fossil or even a species that is a direct ancestor to any other species.
Seriously, we've evolved from field rats to every mammal on the planet in a very short 65 million years. We have discovered millions of species through fossils, and yet, you can not point to a single animal, living or extinct, and say that it evolved into this other different species over here, living of extinct. Man has only roamed the planet for roughly 200,000 years. This article is about a fossil that is 230,000,000 years old. So we can find the fossils of a dinosaurs that lived 230 million years old, but we can not find a single fossil from just 200,000 years ago?
And forget man. You're thinking small. How about we broaden the search? Surely, of all the species that have ever existed, and all the species that are STILL EVOLVING TODAY, you would think that we could find one species somewhere that is a direct ancestor of another.
And again, since you're reading comprehension is obviously weak, I never said that the the lack of this evidence is proof that evolution is false. I said that this is a pretty big fucking piece of evidence that we have not found YET and if I even bring it up, I'm instantly ridiculed. It's almost as if I walked into a %place-of-worship% and started saying that %Deity% doesn't exist.
Do you see what I did there? You take it upon faith that an ancestral species exists for all species and if anyone brings it up, you act as if someone is questioning your faith.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
"So you don't provide any guidance in the education of your children? You let the schools do it all yourself?"
I simply fail to understand why people voted parent message "Troll".
What the parent message says is true.
You just do not let others teach your own children how to think. You have the responsibility too.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !