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.

 

Why Ida fossil is not the missing link

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Why Ida fossil is not the missing link


www.newscientist.com

Found by private collectors in 1983 in Messel, Germany, the press immediately hailed the specimen as a "missing link" and even the "eighth wonder of the world."

But this does not necessarily make Ida a close relative of anthropoids – the group of primates that includes monkeys, apes – and humans. In order to establish that connection, Ida would have to have anthropoid-like features that evolved after anthropoids split away from lemurs and other early primates. Here, alas, Ida fails miserably.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   
The fossil did not have anthropoid-like features, which may tell us about the species tree that was created after the anthropods split.

It proves that research and investigation is essential and we cannot simply take what the media or the press says.

The fossil is not the eight wonder of the world, as the article too says

www.newscientist.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Strangely enough, not too many people are buying the hype about this.
I sure didn't and I'm no scientist.
It wasn't a huge thing back in the 80s and its less relevant now.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty
Strangely enough, not too many people are buying the hype about this.
I sure didn't and I'm no scientist.
It wasn't a huge thing back in the 80s and its less relevant now.


I definatly didnt to buy into this fossilised monkey crap, i believe its another miserable attempt to deny us the real truth of our history..

Creationism and evolution are both crap..

We are universal humans, not native to this planet..



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   
This is already discussed in this topic

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on May, 21 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I think it's supposed to be more of "a" missing link, not "the" missing link. If the fossil can prove species to species evolution that's a big win to Darwinism. I don't think anyone is saying Ida is the species just prior to the caveman.



posted on May, 21 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by jjkenobi
 


Good point. I think they are saying it is a missing link because it shows where we inherited some of our attributes like finger nails.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I watched the programme last night (26 May 2009) on BBC TV about Ida the missing link, narrated by Sir David Attenborough. The programme started with Sir David Attenborough stating that Lucy provided conclusive evidence that humans had descended from apes.
www.apologeticspress.org...

The fossil took the Name Ida from the daughter (Ida) of scientist Jorn Hurum, who led the investigation into the fossil's significance. At one point in the programme, his daughter is in a curled up position on an arm chair when the superimposed skeleton of fossil Ida appears over daughter Ida to suggest it could be a missing link in human evolution.

The entire programme was very misleading - the opening reference to Lucy; the superimposed Ida fossil over Ida daughter; and reference to fossil Ida having broken a wrist which would have meant she moved around mainly on hind legs (like a biped) to reduce pain and further injury to her wrist.

Overall - an insult to the viewers intelligence.

www.independent.co.uk... 1097.html

www.layscience.net...



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join