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.

 

The 'missing link' Found

page: 2
44
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Great news, will watch closely! As for bringing up religion, at the end of the day evolution is a fact, it is undeniable and if people still choose to ignore such a crucial part of reality for comfort or religious views then no amount of new fossil evidence will persuade them otherwise, for the rest of us this is an exciting discovery.

edit on 9-9-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   


Scientists in South Africa say they have discovered a potential missing link in the evolutionary chain

One found, still many to go to fix the broken chain.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I have to laugh out loud. This proves nothing about modern humans. There are many species that lived and died along the way, but only man is unique. The rest were primates, etc. All animals possess intelligence, so having a thumb (excuse the laughter please), does not make it a human ( he he).



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heartisblack
OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?



You're trying to make this point stick, and the only reason it would is because sometimes sh*t sticks to things.
Dinosaurs took 4.3 billion years to evolve, and humans took 4.5 billion years to evolve.
More time, not less.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Errr, no. The gap is so hard to fill because the fossilisation process is an extremely rare occurrence. Most components of formerly living things tend to decompose relatively quickly following death. In order for an organism to be fossilized, the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible, which obviously doesn't always happen

In other words, the conditions under which fossilisation takes place are quite rare; and it is highly unlikely that any given organism will leave behind a fossil


To the OP: great thread. Was just scrolling through the search bar to see if anyone had beaten me to it

edit on 9/9/2011 by Griffo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Heartisblack
 


Who said we are done evolving? There is no finish line. Another million years maybe we won't have pinkies.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Fromabove
 


You need to actually read the article. It is not another species that died off, it contains features that are unique to only chimpanzees and modern humans, and nothing else. Its an ancestor, accept it.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
er no, everyone knows we were put here by god in his image. this is obviously a fake put here by satan to trick us


only kidding, but how many people will post that sorta comment i wonder........



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Heartisblack
OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?



You're trying to make this point stick, and the only reason it would is because sometimes sh*t sticks to things.
Dinosaurs took 4.3 billion years to evolve, and humans took 4.5 billion years to evolve.
More time, not less.


Have you realised how every other point is either more or less time ? I mean come on, some of these evolution books can't even keep the story straight.
edit on 9-9-2011 by Heartisblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Heartisblack
 


thats because the books are written by people who have different ways of interpriting the evidence, but at least there is evidence that we evolved and didnt just appear here overnight like creationism would suggest



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Interesting...

Yeah another Find that we bred amongst the various species of homids that make us!!

im pretty certain we came from many species of Homid breeding to make our current species over much time.. and to be honest i dont see how people have probelms with that... think of dogs...we know they came from certain base species.. bred into pedigree's (species very diffrent form each other) then mongrels the most genetically successful out of them.. why can people not accept somthing similar happened with Humans...

AHHH pride
we surley cant be mongrels.....


And why someone keeps saying in this post we evloved and dinosaurs didnt... they did! what you mean is didnt build cars and spaceships... doesnt mean they didnt evolve, there is a massive difference between not evolving and not advancing technologically...

Guess some of us are further along that evolutionary chain than others




Just my thoughts



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heartisblack

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by CherryV
I'm not sure if we came from Aliens or fossils...but I am interested in this
s&f for great thread


Another point for the Ancient Alien theory!!!

It should be undeniable at this point.

Our 'missing link' is the race of beings that genetically engineered their DNA with primate DNA.

Humans, per say cannot effectively be traced back to a pure species. Thats why our DNA is 96% primate, and 4% 'missing link'.

I'll go deeper into this later today.


Amen, OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?


Exactly!!

According to evolutionists, mankind 'evolved, over a period of about 25 million years, and in anthropologic terms 'arose overnight' into modern man.....

As Sitchin presented, " The appearance of modern man a mere 700k years AFTER homo erectus and some 200k years BEFORE Neanderthal man is absolutely implausible".

Basically, how did the ancestors of modern man appear some some 300k years ago ....instead of 2 or 3 million years into the future, following normal evolutionary development? We should STILL be in caves, lerning how to plant crops and feed ourselves, according to evolution.

There hasn't been enough time, in other words, to be where we are at.

Mankind has QUANTUM Leaped the normal evolution process.

And, we went from horse and buggy to landing on the moon in 67 years......

There was obviously intervention...from a more advanced species.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Heartisblack
 


Different animals evolve at different rates. A factor of how quick an organism evolves is tied in with how fast an organism can reproduce.

Bacteria, for example, can evolve rapidly as they can reproduce really quickly. E. coli can reproduce once every 20 minutes iirc

Humans, not so much. We take 9 months (give or take a few days), so obviously we evolve a lot slower



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by Heartisblack

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by CherryV
I'm not sure if we came from Aliens or fossils...but I am interested in this
s&f for great thread


Another point for the Ancient Alien theory!!!

It should be undeniable at this point.

Our 'missing link' is the race of beings that genetically engineered their DNA with primate DNA.

Humans, per say cannot effectively be traced back to a pure species. Thats why our DNA is 96% primate, and 4% 'missing link'.

I'll go deeper into this later today.


Amen, OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?


Exactly!!

According to evolutionists, mankind 'evolved, over a period of about 25 million years, and in anthropologic terms 'arose overnight' into modern man.....

As Sitchin presented, " The appearance of modern man a mere 700k years AFTER homo erectus and some 200k years BEFORE Neanderthal man is absolutely implausible".

Basically, how did the ancestors of modern man appear some some 300k years ago ....instead of 2 or 3 million years into the future, following normal evolutionary development? We should STILL be in caves, lerning how to plant crops and feed ourselves, according to evolution.

There hasn't been enough time, in other words, to be where we are at.

Mankind has QUANTUM Leaped the normal evolution process.

And, we went from horse and buggy to landing on the moon in 67 years......

There was obviously intervention...from a more advanced species.



No this is untrue....

do some people really not understand how this works?

if you follow the course of evolution there were very few large mamls compeating for meat eating at the same time of us, we took to standing upright quite quickly which gave us many advantages that other animals dont have, because we were able to use smaller less comploexed tools early on we had advantages.. because of the way our "herds" evolved to communicate with each other we had an advantage.. these three small(ish) factors combinded together to allow us to progress in the relativley quick way we have, after having tools though we were nto fighting for domination of resources as we could at that point kill anything that caused us problems, after creation (or harnessing) fire and spears no animal could kill our young.. we were able to boom in a short period of time in population with no predators to be worried about...

this allowed us to become what we are...


as i siad, we diversified, then bred together and became mongrels...

Lizards and mamals have fetures that meant evolutionary paths are different,

Atmospheric conditions, weather, tempeture and natural predators allowed dinosaurs to become large, and to have smaller numebrs of lots of slightly varied species...


ALl our species bred together.. no competition, just working together to create one super species... the varients that couldnt/wouldnt breed died out... all the other varients were bred out!


Why do people have so much problem with this...

Dogs/Cats/birds/fish... we have seem similar evolution to a point through forced breeding with them.

The reaosn no other species progresses is natural predators.. the line that always stops with us now, as we haveclub/knife/sword/gun.




Just my thoughts



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by StripedBandit

Originally posted by Freedom_is_Slavery


This is interesting stuff, I wonder what all the creationists have to say about this one,



Don't bait them into it, they will call the fossils a test of faith or something.


Very interesting post, but is it the Definitive missing link? Or one of many?

S&F OP Great Post.
edit on 9-9-2011 by StripedBandit because: (no reason given)

It is yet another example of an animal between ape and man. Exactly where it lies on the lineage or branch or parallel evolution is not yet known. However, one thing is certain the path from ape to man is no longer a simple one! and gets more complex all the time. Interbreeding confuses things as well. But it's all still Darwinian



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I still can't figure out who evolved first, the male or the female of the species???
Or was the 'first' a hemorphidite, and it just e'ffed itself???



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heartisblack

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Heartisblack
OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?



You're trying to make this point stick, and the only reason it would is because sometimes sh*t sticks to things.
Dinosaurs took 4.3 billion years to evolve, and humans took 4.5 billion years to evolve.
More time, not less.


Have you realised how every other point is either more or less time ? I mean come on, some of these evolution books can't even keep the story straight.
edit on 9-9-2011 by Heartisblack because: (no reason given)


It seems the problem you are having is that you want an absolute answer. Religion, no matter how ridiculous, will give you an absolute answer.

Science allows for the tinkering of ideas with the addition of new evidence--it's very refreshing compared to absolutism.

When employing the scientific method, one is to do everything possible to disprove the hypothesis. It's the absolute opposite of.....well....you know who.

We can only describe what we observe--the evidence. Evolution, especially human evolution, is logical. The bones are there--they show evidence of gradual changes over time. How does it not make sense?



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 



According to evolutionists, mankind 'evolved, over a period of about 25 million years, and in anthropologic terms 'arose overnight' into modern man.....


Do you call people who believe in gravity (i.e. everyone) gravitists? Or people who believe in relativity - relitavists? Or even people who believe in cell theory - cellists? [I use believe in this circumstance for lack of a better word. As, believe in these theories or not, they are still true]

"Arose overnight" is probably using geographical terms, in which it actually means many hundreds of thousands of years (or even millions)


" The appearance of modern man a mere 700k years AFTER homo erectus and some 200k years BEFORE Neanderthal man is absolutely implausible".


Does this Sitchen fella go into more detail as to why it is implausible?


Basically, how did the ancestors of modern man appear some some 300k years ago ....instead of 2 or 3 million years into the future, following normal evolutionary development? We should STILL be in caves, lerning how to plant crops and feed ourselves, according to evolution.


Why should we still be living in caves? Homo sapiens means "knowing man"; H. sapiens was smarter than the other hominids that preceded it


Mankind has QUANTUM Leaped the normal evolution process.


YEAH!! Throw some complicated words in to make people think you know what you are talking about, but don't really mean anything.


And, we went from horse and buggy to landing on the moon in 67 years......


And I suppose all of those hard working inventors just sat on their arse's every day of their lives until an alien/Jesus/FSM appeared in their head and told them what to do?


There was obviously intervention...from a more advanced species.


[Citation needed]



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Im not totally denying evolution...but ive always wondered...if we evolved from chimps/apes..why do we still have some running around? slow learners? -shrugs-

S&F thanks for sharing OP



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Heartisblack

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Heartisblack
OP is trying to make this stick and it's not sticking. I know dinosaurs have been dead for over 65 million years but we supposedly evolved in less time then them ? What makes us so bloody special ?



You're trying to make this point stick, and the only reason it would is because sometimes sh*t sticks to things.
Dinosaurs took 4.3 billion years to evolve, and humans took 4.5 billion years to evolve.
More time, not less.


Have you realised how every other point is either more or less time ? I mean come on, some of these evolution books can't even keep the story straight.
edit on 9-9-2011 by Heartisblack because: (no reason given)


It seems the problem you are having is that you want an absolute answer. Religion, no matter how ridiculous, will give you an absolute answer.

Science allows for the tinkering of ideas with the addition of new evidence--it's very refreshing compared to absolutism.

When employing the scientific method, one is to do everything possible to disprove the hypothesis. It's the absolute opposite of.....well....you know who.

We can only describe what we observe--the evidence. Evolution, especially human evolution, is logical. The bones are there--they show evidence of gradual changes over time. How does it not make sense?


With the Technology we have and they can't give us a straight answer ?

Right and I'm a milk man.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join