It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fossil Discovery Is Heralded

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Fossil Discovery Is Heralded


online.wsj.com

In what could prove to be a landmark discovery, a leading paleontologist said scientists have dug up the 47 million-year-old fossil of an ancient primate whose features suggest it could be the common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes and humans....Based on previously limited fossil evidence, one big debate had been whether the tarsidae or adapidae group gave rise to monkeys, apes and humans. The latest discovery bolsters the less common position that our ancient ape-like
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   
First of all - you can have creationism and evolution coexisting. But this should stoke the fire a bit...with the "missing link" found, I wonder what the creationist take will be. A complete 47 million year old fossil find is very rare - Lucy was nearly complete and not nearly that old.
Interesting that the fossil discovery was kept under wraps for 2 years as well.

online.wsj.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Found in Germany but unveiled in New York USA by Mayor Bloomberg?

What the hells the point of shipping it around the world?

Is the American Insitute of Natural History trying to snatch the credit for it? or did a team from there actually discover it?

And who the hells the Mayor in relation to the find? talk about publicity slut.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


Wow....never thought of that...the fossil is in hiding for 2 years. It is released today and The History Channel will have the exclusive video of the find, with the scientists and all the research that went into it.

And for Bloomberg - yeah, he's a jerk.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


Nventual - if I may ask, does this "missing link" do anything to change your spiritual or evolution beliefs?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
news.sky.com... /200905315284582?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15284582_Missing_Link%3A_Scientists_In_New_York_Unveil_Fossil_Of_Lemur_Monkey_Hailed_As _Mans_Earliest_Ancestor

More Info from SkyNews on this...Good link!

edit - just can't get the link right...

[edit on 19-5-2009 by harddrive21]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by harddrive21
reply to post by Nventual
 


Nventual - if I may ask, does this "missing link" do anything to change your spiritual or evolution beliefs?

Not for me. It doesn't explain how we have this level of "consciousness" that no other animal in our recorded existence has had. I still think we are a product of some sort of intelligent design possibly millions of years ago who knew facts about the universe and creation that we couldn't even comprehend.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
posted on 19-5-2009 @ 10:00 AM single this post edit"quote"REPLY TO:


harddrive21,

"First of all - you can have creationism and evolution coexisting".

EXACTLY RIGHT!!! I mean Why not? We do as we speak. Scientists genectically engineer animals in labratories giving them stronger traits. Is that not a form of creationism? I mean we did create this "new" speacies right. type in glowing animals on a google search. That aint evolution my friend. but also don't be so close minded to not realize that evolution doesn't occur. Because that again we know happens too. To gain true understanding question everything, especially question yourself and your own beliefs. Answers come more easy that way.




[edit on 19-5-2009 by GeechQuestInfo]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Nventual - I don't think I have ever heard it put that well before. The issue of consciousness definitely cannot be proven with bones/fossils or any other record that we find buried. So are you a fan/believer of alien intervention creating consciousness in humans or a Divine hand? I could believe the alien explanation (we are at the beginning of creating life in the lab and altering genes and DNA) but not to sold on a Higher Being creating all 10000 years ago.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   


BBC One brings you the story behind what could be one of the most important scientific discoveries of the 21st century.
The film, written and narrated by David Attenborough, is set to change our understanding of evolution.



bbc programming


I like the difference in reporting between the bbc and sky - sky being very sensationalist! Wow - if this keeps on going then the story will be blown up to enormous proportions to the point that if its actually proved a dud they wont be able to reverse it!



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Unlike the OP has said, this can't be the missing link if it is the "common ancestor" of all apes and humans because it being the "common ancestor" would indicate that all modern primates decended from it.

If it was found in Germany, doesn't that fly in the face of evolutionary theory because, from what I learned in Biology class, humanity was supposed to have come from Africa, no?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Nventual

Is it correct to say that we have a level of conciousness that animals don't? Perhaps? But i would be more specific. Conciousness is 2 things, subconscious and a waking physical counciousness. I've always felt that animals i.e. dogs, dolphins, whales etc... had a more aware supconscious (6th sense?) and us as humans had a more aware waking conciousness. Perhaps creation is creating the physical concsciousness and evolution is creating a higher subconscious.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


So if I understand you correctly - becoming self aware is creationism and the formation of knowledge is evolution?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Thats a good question. My belief is that they are almost one in the same. a 50/50 mix to make life. God or The Creator or whatever you prefer creates the physical universe correct? Our bodies, our land, our water; the tangible things one can grab hold of. He/She/It "created" the actual physical universe. Thats the first part 50% of life, thats creationism. But God or The Creator or whatever you prefer also gave us a subconciousness. Thats your emotions, or the things in this universe that are not tangible, that one cannot grab a hold of. As your subconsciousness grows we cannot actually see it but we know it is happening. I guess thats the becoming self aware part of life. Thats what I would refer to as true evolution. Evolution is adapting but it's not just adapting in a physical way the way Charles Darwin postulated, I would say evolution is deeper. It has a non-physical part of it as well that Darwin unfortunately was unable to see because of the time in history he lived. With the technology available now and the way we are able to pass knowledge world wide with one click of a mouse I think it would be safe to say that Darwin would most definately change his theories, because as time passes on the human race does evolve. I think everyone on this forum would agree that WE as a planet are becoming much more self-aware. We can argue theories all we want but in the end can we at leasat all agree that there are physical and spiritual changes going on as we speak (type)? It's a great time to be alive



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
If the world really is millions of years old, how can they expect to find one "missing link" that proves everything? Wouldn't there be hundred, if not thousands, of animals between each of the species we know now?
I don't believe in evolution, and I predict that this will turn out to be a hunch of hype, just like lucy.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
One-Man

That's assuming that when evolution truly happens that you stay on this planet. What if evolution is when a species transcends modern consiousness and moves to a higher spiritual plane? Plus in order to find something 47 million years old you would have to dig through 47 million years of Earth. No easy task, so to answer your question "no" to me it would not make sense that these "missing-links" would just be scattered about this planet easily to find. Think about it, how many dinosaur fossils to we have that are intact and how many dinosaurs existed on this planet? I'm pretty sure we had more living dinosaurs on this planet millions of years ago than we have intact fossils on this planet as of current time correct?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by harddrive21
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


So if I understand you correctly - becoming self aware is creationism and the formation of knowledge is evolution?

Well on the other hand, becoming self-aware may be an attribute of becoming intelligent in the evolution cycle that only we have reached (I understand maybe some Animals ARE a bit self-aware but certainly not to the degree we are)?

Oh look at that, my previous post has been deleted as well. Censorship sure runs high in these parts.

Consciousness had to come in before any sort of worship of the Sun or worship of trees, etc. I wish there was a time line that showed us the huge jump between our common ancestor were we progressed into consciously aware beings and whereas the apes were stuck relying on instincts.

Was it before we developed a language? If so, then how did the first consciously aware "human" feel when he couldn't explain anything to anybody and where he was the only consciously aware person in his known existence. Pretty damn lonely I'd say. Even if it was after we developed a language it would still be lonely.



[edit on 19/5/09 by Nventual]



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by harddrive21
 


The actual news was "POSSIBLE" missing link found. Not "ABSOLUTE PROOF".

So the bones are somewhat like that of a Lemur. Why did evolution not dramatically change the Lemurs that are all over the jungles today?

In my opinion, this is nothing more than wishful thinking.

en.wikipedia.org...



[edit on 20-5-2009 by warrenb]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join