"Yeah the media hyped it up and had no idea what they were talking about, that's not sciences fault etc"
When you have scientist promoting the hype, even calling it Darwinius thinking that revealing this find close to Darwins birthday would be a real knee slapper doesn't help. Yes agreed. Hey, I'm all for science. It shows no mercy on anyone. Science doesn't care if your a neo Darwinist. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for many who claim to arbitrarily & exclusively speak for science.
"Researchers note in one article published in the Journal of Human Evolution that Darwinius masillae is not a haplorhine primate like humans, apes and monkeys, as the 2009 research claimed. They also note that the article on Darwinius published last year ignores two decades of published research showing that similar fossils are actually strepsirrhines, the primate group that includes lemurs and lorises"
First it was touted as the 8th wonder of the world. Some said it was a Mona Lisa that people would be talking about for a hundred years and that...... "This is the first link to all humans," Hurum, of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, said in a statement. Ida represents "the closest thing we can get to a direct ancestor."
Now its been demoted to a nice transition from dry nose to wet nose "basal primate" (an uncommon term) OK sure buddy. PS. I already spoke to Aronra about this.
@benthemiester Yeah the media hyped it up and had no idea what they were talking about, that's not sciences fault and it certainly doesn't do it any favors.
"Not sure where you're getting that, it fills in a gap nicely as the ancestor to wet and dry nosed primates"
I'm not sure why you think it is a transitional when so many other scientist have refuted this claim. The original claim was that it was one of our ancestors. Now you say the above. How do you know whether its nose was dry or wet?
Fossil of a lemer its mom was a lemer it children are lemers so what no matter how you look at it it is no missing link no matter how much you want it to be.
@TheScienceFoundation Lemer lemur you know what I mean no missing link or transitional because macro does not exist there is micro or adaptation thats all.
@glendaweil No, see you're confusing just making the same claim over and over again as somehow having evidenced that claim. You've defined neither, nor have you supported anything.
@TheScienceFoundation Your the one confused we did not come from apes and the is no macro one animal macro evolving into another completely different animal.
@glendaweil There seems to be a communication breakdown. Genetic homeostasis is what you've been claiming in various forms, I'm asking for the actual evidence of it.
@TheScienceFoundation To prove your so called macro of course oh let me guess your respnse we do not need transitionals to prove macro we have tons of micro evidence just add billions of years RIGHT.
@glendaweil "I do not want them you are the one who needs them not me"
Great come back, I wish I had thought of that line. lol The new definition of transitional fossils is that all animals, whether they be extinct, or extant, are transitional. Hence there is no way to falsify the paradigm. At least Darwin had the balls to admit they were lacking. Unfortunately I cant say the same for the neo Darwinist of today.
hosted my Charlton Heston, professionally made for TV, then banned from TV. It proves the history we are taught in school is a lie and it disproves much of evolution (and) some of creation. very interesting show, watch all five parts.
Cathy - atheists don't own the textbooks, scientists do. What tested and demonstrable scientific facts can you indentify in the Bible? Where in the bible does it discuss biology or the origin of microbial life? The Bible belongs in a ancient literature classroom (taught as mythology alongside Jason and the Argonauts) not in a science classroom. There is no bias against religion in science, only bias against false truths. Don't be taken in by creationist propoganda. There is no conspiricy.
Man, they weren't overstating the case at all, or anything. First link to man? What were all the other species leading up to Ida for three billions years before that? This like finding the letter "W" and proclaiming you've found the first link on the road to the letter "Z". It's a bit much.
I gather Ida represents a species ancestral to both wet-nosed primates, like lemurs, and dry-nosed primates, like us. She represents a "missing" link between those two lines; that's all. Take a Ritalin.
The New Scientist concludes that while Ida is a remarkably complete specimen that promises to teach us a great deal about the biology of some of the earliest and least human-like of all known primates, the Eocene adapiforms, the fossil is not a missing link — at least not between anthropoids and more primitive primates. Further study may reveal her to be a missing link between other species of Eocene adapiforms, but this hardly solidifies her status as the eighth wonder of the world.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I can't stand it, "Ida fills in a very important gap..." And what gap is that? Which one? Your tree is full of them! In fact there is so many pretty color crayon lines leading nowhere, it is beyond me how you call that overwhelming facts! And how is it the tree has stood that way for 200 yrs! Ida is another desparate claim, that has already been refuted by your own scientists! Ida is a beautiful detailed fossil of a lemur that drowned and was buried rapidly in a flood catastrophy, like the rest.
except the vast majority of fossils are in horrible condition. complete skeletons are the exception, not the norm, as we would expect from a global flood. there is no flood layer. nothing to indicate a global flood ever happened.
Ever looked down on the mountain ranges from an airplane, anywhere in the world? They all look the same, like Alot of water receded off of them, thats the top layer, the flood layer my friend, and no other layer is like that. All kinds of phenomenon can happen in a global flood, and many could have been buried near the top layer. Just think where all the birds were until they tired and had no where to land? Think about those who could not run fast, the slowest would be in the lowest..layer.
water recedes off of mountains because it rains. .are you claiming no other layers show erosion? birds arent found in only the top layer. slow animals, like snails and bugs and things, are found near the top as well as lower down, and it all fits with the philogenetic tree, so much so that we can predict where certain kinds of fossils will show up. the very fact that we find multiple layers, with fossils throughout, rather than one with fossils throughout, disproves the flood.
PROVES IT. When there is a flood of BIBLICAL proportions,there are fossils in every layer! There is somewhat calm water,whirlpools,tidal waves,undercurrents (back & forth) & etc. And when and where has it rained enough for water to flow off of the peak of every mountain? It's too bad you kids are not taught real scientific facts in determining the cause of past phenomenons of the earth. But real science is not taught, it goes against the religious philosophy they teach in the schools now-a-days.
actually, all of that would only create one layer, with bones scattered throughout in no particular order, not multiple layers with signs of multiple phenomona (including asteroid impacts, droughts etc.) and bones arranged in a nested hierarchy spanning several billion years.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There are no facts which support "billions of years" A presupposition that is supported by altering real isotope ages to fit the evolutionary process. In a way, it IS one layer, divided into sediments of mud, and rock, soot and ash and everything else that randomly settled trapping drowning animals that were buried quickly and preserved. There is NO proof of any nested hierarchy anywhere! It's just how they were deposited-randomly and most in pieces mixed w/other fossil pieces. The G.C. is rare!
sorry but things don't settle randomly in a flood, they settle in one graduated layer, with heavier particles toward the bottom, lighter ones toward the top. what we find is that in the ground we find those densities all mixed up with stark contrasts between them. a single globablized flood fails to adequatly explain this. and actually the proof for the nested hierarchy is eerywhere. and not just in fossils, but in dna, eer heard of ataisms and retroviruses?
weberly you havent made a single point either. you just patted cathy on the back and then took a jab at 0x8x0. good job. the funny part is that neither you nor cathy have any idea what you are talking about.
The trouble is, there is no verifiable dating system in the millions and billions of years theory. Shortly after George Washington died, someone said "Wait! I think we evolved millions of years ago!" So now when we do have a dating science, it's abused and is a front for fitting everything into the presupposed (that makes it fraud) they call "science". You should really check out the truth of what they don't tell you. Theres more hidden agenda's than there is any truth in this darwinistic faith.
once again. you need to explain. give me specific cases that proe dating systems are unreliable, or that george washingtons death is somhow connected to a darwinistic conspiracy.
cathy cathy cathy, where the fuck are those hidden agenda's? WHERE? Tell us some of those hidden agendas, come on we are waiting. I hope you do not mean that conspiracy theory of yours where everyone is against your god and jesus the lord etc? Well, surprise for you, there is no god and a jesus who walks on water. Yes, there is a Bugs Bunny from Walt Disney, but there is no god around this planet.
There is no point in debating with Cathy, she is lost, she denies all the facts and runs and hides, let her live her life in darkness, I think it would be best for all. Do you remember the new film planet of the apes (if you have seen it) when all the truth came out Thade, just sat in a corner shaking, this is where Cathy is right now.
i might should have said monkeys and mammals. in any case i don't really "get" it. i've heard time and time again there's no missing link, it's a myth, and that all species are transitional forms, etc. i realize that this fossil is in remarkable shape, and that lemurs are considered an ancient species, they are prosimian. so now these shared features would possibly bring it more into our direct line of ancestry? anyway i'll check out that video.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Fussion of Chromosome theory was proven to be a sham.
Quote: "The moon broke off the earth" ha ha ha (r u retarded?)
er? then it just hung around, never flying away
and never coliding back into the bigger chunk.
And the stuff it is made of is so rare on earth, that scientists call finds, "moon rocks" stating small meteors knocked them off the moon. ha! in fact the moon is hollow, seizmic recorders found it rang like a bell when struck by objects. We never see the dark side.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Hm, have you varified that with your own DNA? If not quit presupposing and assuming. Use science to prove scientific facts. They have labs to find that out, you know. Go varify it for yourself.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ok TSF, was one ape more primitive than us and the other more advanced? ...to explain our appearence? Think about it. It's the only answer if your polished cromo is true. Alien/monkey gene splice.
Look some little bitches gave my above post some thumbs down for the obvious sole purpose of wishing to hide the information. At least leave an interesting post alone you little peeon disinfo agent guideline readers. (headquarters is short handed, and hire low IQs from Eastern Europe now)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the truth is there is not one shread of evidence suporting evolution, and whenever they are asked to produce it, they simply say, it is in the books and that you are too uneducated to understand it, that is their generic answer, even though we can indeed understand how DNA displays hard core evidence of intelligent design.
the proof is chromosome two. we have found that chromosome two is fused together which is why we have 46 chromosomes (23 base pairs) compared to the other apes 48 (24 pairs)
that is absolute proof. just youtube or google search chromosome 2.
also what is your level of education in biology or molecular biology?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Quote: "the proof is chromosome two. we have found that chromosome two is fused together which is why we have 46 chromosomes (23 base pairs) compared to the other apes 48 (24 pairs)"
Reply:
ha ha ha That means nothing. But the desired effect is that the reader will say to themselves, "I don't get it, but I dont want to look stupid, so I will just agree with it"
what do you mean it means nothing? they see a fusion of chromosome 2 which is a prediction made by evolution theory. we see that prediction play out right there in genetic biology.
the effect it ought to have is THAT YOU GO LOOK IT UP. search it and study it yourself.
what you have done is say "i dont understand this so it must be nonsense"
HOW is that ANYTHING like a creationist predicting the moon rotates the earth? the creationist will say the moon rotates because god set it there and spun it....i can show you the math of how we know the moon was broken off of our planet by being hit by another mars size planet.
the fusion of chromosome 2 prediction says that if we evolved from apes there should be a marker showing a fusion....low and behold it does...you are sad you are arguing and you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
contrare most Evolutionist believe in creation, but don't want others believing in it, because they might start reading more of the scriptures, including Revelation 13:16 wherein is described the microchip implant prepared for the sheeple by the International Banksters Synagogue of Satan (Revelation 2:9)
"And he causeth all ... to receive a mark in their right hand or foreheads, that no man might buy or sell save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.....
it is the number of a man and his number is 666."
that doesnt say computer chip. i wish i was crazy enough to make giant leaps of faith to justify my already established delusions...congratulations. you are crazy.
I don't doubt the fossil record, it shows many extinct animals, and no possibility for evolution, in fact the fossil record is some of the best evidence against evolution. The weird thing is, evolutionists, athiest (sexual diviants and satanist) hate the bible because it puts down their party life style. maybe so but you satanist have no rules against lying. Which makes a debate with you tricky. So you can simply lie and say the fossil record proves your point. Where as I have to tell truth
OH! then praise be unto thee, holiest of Followers. For surely you speak no lies, for your god bound you not to. And from your noble tongue, you must have spoken from birth till death only truth. For it is not within your heart nor your religion to do otherwise. You are a Shining example of Christianity and I thank you for it....
how do they not use science? you know science isnt a tangible thing what you must mean is the scientific method. and yes they certainly do. if you believe they do not please explain so
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Notice they use the words, "could shed light" "may have found" and it will be like an asteroid hitting the earth! They put it together like a preview of a hollywood science fiction movie, to lie to kids! How dumb, they are saying that their research will be reknowned and famous, not the evidence for darwinistic evolution ever happening! So these scientists are only using your tax dollar to run a hoax on society and to undermine real science, just to get rich and famous!
they use those words because nothing is 100% not even your belief in a god. they use those words because they JUST found the specimen. it will take some testing and then retesting by independant groups to verify the discovery.
scientists in no way are rich and famous. you have some weird view on reality. if anything the pope and the morons running churches have more money than our respectable scientists who ACTUALLY benefit our lives unlike the clergy who do nothing but burden us all.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Typical, a big show, a spotlight, a celebrity "runway" a preview of the claim to come, and no evidence! AHaha! And what is really funny is that they actually admit it's the only one found that is a true missing link! So in otherwords, they now finally have a link, but the whole chain has never been found! In otherwords, it was never a scientific theory in the first place!There was never any facts surrounding it! Sad for them, I'll bet we don't have it's DNA either.Another hoax.Embarrassing, huh?
you should be embarrassed to reveal to youtube your complete ignorance of science.
its one thing to believe in a make believe man in the sky that made you out of nothing but dont try to call scientists liars. IF there was evidence against evolution the scientist who found it would be given a nobel prize and be one of the most famous men in history. scientists are merely looking at the evidence and telling you what it says. if you want to not believe them that is your stupidity.
okay not every animal that dies fossilizes actually the VAST majority decay away. the specimen must die in a certain way in a certain place for it to fossilize. given how rare it is that things fossilize we also have to think how rare it would be to find THE ONLY species of this animal and that it fossilized. that would be ridiculous. there must have been many of these creatures.
wow...not all mutations are negative you have no idea what you are talking about.
that is why black people have evolved that ability and not white people. that would not be a beneficial mutation for a race in our conditions but it is a beneficial mutation for their environment.
a mutation isnt always a new head you obviously have a flawed view of the word mutation. maybe you should go look it up.
carbon dating is NOT wacko. sure there are samples that give flawed results so we use a different method. but when all methods say the same date we know it is accurate.
Mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organisms DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology—all aspects of its life. So a change in an organisms DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life.
an adaptation that comes about from a change in the genetic information is a mutation.
i feel like im arguing with a 15 year old who has never taken a single course on biology.
no mutations will make a new species...an animal will be a new species once it can no longer have fertile babies with the original species...if you take billions of years and enough mutations the one specie will look and be much different then the others.
if you put the same animal on a freezing cold island and some on a desert island in a million years they would be two different species....you are arguing against well established fact and you have not given ANY evidence FOR your position.
ARE YOU SERIOUS??? you dont believe that the universe and earth has existed that long? what the hell is wrong with you? how do you justify that?
the fact that we can see stars that are billions of light years away shows how old this universe and planet is.
to see a star you are seeing the light given from that star. light takes time to travel that star could be 3 billioin light years away meaning that it took 3 billion years for that light to get to us for us to see it. we see stars is proof
also carbon dating shows that isotopes decay over a period of time. by testing with 14 different methods of carbon dating we can see them all show the same answer giving us the age of that material.
of course there are cases where ONE or TWO of the methods will give flawed results BUT we know when that happens and we check the OTHER methods and when ALL those methods show the SAME answer we know conclusively the age.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
LiveScience reports that "Idas unveiling was highly scripted (with some Barnum and Bailey aspects, said paleontologist Richard Kay of Duke University). More important, it can now be said the findings may well have been significantly overstated. We wont know for sure until further research is done. But if this event causes the public to distrust science and media, that distrust is well placed." (Ida Fossil Hype Went Too Far by Robert Roy Britt, May 20, 2009)
Richard Kay, a paleontologist at Duke University said, There is NO phylogenetic analysis to support the claims, and the data is cherry-picked.
Callum Ross, a paleontologist at the University of Chicago said, Their claim that this specimen should be classified as haplorhine is UNSUPPORTABLE in light of modern methods of classification.
Revolutionary Fossil Fails to Dazzle Paleontologists
That thing is as small as the baby pig on youtube "decomposition of baby pigs" and if you watch it you can see that it decomposes completely skin AND BONE
water speeds up decomposition
volcanic eruptions melt even metal
bury a metal rod in the earth and come back in 10 years and you will be able to break it with your hands
The Titanic itself is getting eaten away from the salt water at the bottom of the ocean.
I would say you can't because judgement in reserved for God not us. It is ok to say something is wrong but to say you know where someone is going is a little much.
We should focus on now, instead of guessing how God is going to judge people.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
And the FINAL SCORE is: Darwin WON - Creationists LOST"
Not according to Dr. Hurum's report:
[The species] COULD represent a stem group from which later anthropoid primates evolved [the line leading to humans], but WE ARE NOT ADVOCATING THIS HERE.
The scientific reviewers of PLoS ONE asked that they tone down their original claims that the fossil was on the human evolutionary line. (The Guardian)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Great points, why can't people talk about this? Lets see what everyone has to say when they get a chance to look at the evidence and check it against the what we know?
I have over 50 paleo videos on fossils / geology .New lectures every month from oldest fossil club in the USA .Check out my videos , new ones added monthly !
OK thanks, I just wanted to be sure it wasn't thrown in to add some sort of unnecessary hype to this, not that it would be any less a magnificent discovery.
It seems to me anyone who disagrees is just pushed to the side. It may be and it may not be, but the fact remains there are people who challenge evo. bit they are ignored , not on scientific method just on the case that evo is true? Complexity and "Gene for Novelty" Spring to mind.
Also why do Atheist think that evo will disprove God. It is a science, it has no ability or authority in matters of the spirit.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Is this from the Super Mario Brothers movie with Dennis Hopper? or did I just miss something?
I knew that when I was little and watched the Super Mario Brothers movie that it was real, and this just proved it!!!
HELP ME JESUS (I mean Mario and Luigi!!)
People need to watch "Decomposition of baby pigs" on youtube. I myself dont believe in fossilization because bones dont last more than 150 yeas when buried in the earth. and the sunk titanic is getting eaten up by the salt water too.
How is it a missint link? from what I hear, it has leaping primate as well as climbing primate trates which makes it compleately functional in it's enviroment. I thought a transitional form is suposed to be adapting, not fully adapted?
these are real questions I have, can anybody answer them?
We are now resorting to a really old dead lemur as the missing link to man? I guess desperate times call for desperate measures.
QuinnBook 4 months ago
"Yeah the media hyped it up and had no idea what they were talking about, that's not sciences fault etc"
When you have scientist promoting the hype, even calling it Darwinius thinking that revealing this find close to Darwins birthday would be a real knee slapper doesn't help. Yes agreed. Hey, I'm all for science. It shows no mercy on anyone. Science doesn't care if your a neo Darwinist. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for many who claim to arbitrarily & exclusively speak for science.
benthemiester 6 months ago
"Researchers note in one article published in the Journal of Human Evolution that Darwinius masillae is not a haplorhine primate like humans, apes and monkeys, as the 2009 research claimed. They also note that the article on Darwinius published last year ignores two decades of published research showing that similar fossils are actually strepsirrhines, the primate group that includes lemurs and lorises"
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester "Defining
characters of Darwinius ally it with early haplorhines rather than
strepsirrhines. We do not interpret Darwinius as anthropoid, but
the adapoid primates it represents deserve more careful comparison
with higher primates than they have received in the past."
Complete Primate Skeleton from the Middle Eocene of Messel in Germany: Morphology and Paleobiology
Not only do they not ignore the studies, they cite over a dozen of them specifically to differentiate.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
First it was touted as the 8th wonder of the world. Some said it was a Mona Lisa that people would be talking about for a hundred years and that...... "This is the first link to all humans," Hurum, of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, said in a statement. Ida represents "the closest thing we can get to a direct ancestor."
Now its been demoted to a nice transition from dry nose to wet nose "basal primate" (an uncommon term) OK sure buddy. PS. I already spoke to Aronra about this.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Yeah the media hyped it up and had no idea what they were talking about, that's not sciences fault and it certainly doesn't do it any favors.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
"Not sure where you're getting that, it fills in a gap nicely as the ancestor to wet and dry nosed primates"
I'm not sure why you think it is a transitional when so many other scientist have refuted this claim. The original claim was that it was one of our ancestors. Now you say the above. How do you know whether its nose was dry or wet?
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester AronRa has a series on how we know what place Ida had in the simian lineage.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
Another supposed missing link, gone by the way side.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Not sure where you're getting that, it fills in a gap nicely as the ancestor to wet and dry nosed primates.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
Fossil of a lemer its mom was a lemer it children are lemers so what no matter how you look at it it is no missing link no matter how much you want it to be.
glendaweil 8 months ago
@glendaweil I think you mean it's not a lemur no matter how much creationists want to remain ignorant of its placement in phylogent.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Lemer lemur you know what I mean no missing link or transitional because macro does not exist there is micro or adaptation thats all.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil Other than timescale, the difference is?
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation No proof of macro only micro or adaptation that the difference.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil No, that's your claim. I'm asking you to define both
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation I know micro means small adaptation is micro macro self explanitory and does not happen.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil No, see you're confusing just making the same claim over and over again as somehow having evidenced that claim. You've defined neither, nor have you supported anything.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Your the one confused we did not come from apes and the is no macro one animal macro evolving into another completely different animal.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil Not only did we come from apes, we are apes by definition.
You keep making the same claim, this is not evidence.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation No you are wrong.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil How so?
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Ida is not transitional there are none and macro does not occur.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil Those are certainly the claims you've made over and over. By 'how so' I meant how so specifically?
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Genetic homeostasis to be exact.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil There seems to be a communication breakdown. Genetic homeostasis is what you've been claiming in various forms, I'm asking for the actual evidence of it.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation 250 million fossils and no missing link or transitions have been unearthed but keep looking.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil What transition do you want fossils for?
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation To prove your so called macro of course oh let me guess your respnse we do not need transitionals to prove macro we have tons of micro evidence just add billions of years RIGHT.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil No, my response was 'What transition do you want fossils for?'
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation I do not want them you are the one who needs them not me.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil We already have them, I'm asking you which ones do you want me to present.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation What you percieve as transitional.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil No, by definition transitional
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation who's definition.
glendaweil 6 months ago
@glendaweil Transitional fossils are the fossilized remains of lifeforms that exhibit characteristics typical of two distinct taxonomic groups.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@glendaweil "I do not want them you are the one who needs them not me"
Great come back, I wish I had thought of that line. lol The new definition of transitional fossils is that all animals, whether they be extinct, or extant, are transitional. Hence there is no way to falsify the paradigm. At least Darwin had the balls to admit they were lacking. Unfortunately I cant say the same for the neo Darwinist of today.
benthemiester 6 months ago
well i guess they did find anything year two years later
vnio15 10 months ago
Watch a Youtube Video called
"The mysterious Origins of Man"
hosted my Charlton Heston, professionally made for TV, then banned from TV. It proves the history we are taught in school is a lie and it disproves much of evolution (and) some of creation. very interesting show, watch all five parts.
PhuqueU 2 years ago
To save some time, how about reply with the 5 most pertinent arguments in the video series.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
Cathy - atheists don't own the textbooks, scientists do. What tested and demonstrable scientific facts can you indentify in the Bible? Where in the bible does it discuss biology or the origin of microbial life? The Bible belongs in a ancient literature classroom (taught as mythology alongside Jason and the Argonauts) not in a science classroom. There is no bias against religion in science, only bias against false truths. Don't be taken in by creationist propoganda. There is no conspiricy.
TimMcGrath74 2 years ago
Comment removed
TimMcGrath74 2 years ago
Comment removed
TimMcGrath74 2 years ago
Man, they weren't overstating the case at all, or anything. First link to man? What were all the other species leading up to Ida for three billions years before that? This like finding the letter "W" and proclaiming you've found the first link on the road to the letter "Z". It's a bit much.
I gather Ida represents a species ancestral to both wet-nosed primates, like lemurs, and dry-nosed primates, like us. She represents a "missing" link between those two lines; that's all. Take a Ritalin.
PatchesRips 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The New Scientist concludes that while Ida is a remarkably complete specimen that promises to teach us a great deal about the biology of some of the earliest and least human-like of all known primates, the Eocene adapiforms, the fossil is not a missing link — at least not between anthropoids and more primitive primates. Further study may reveal her to be a missing link between other species of Eocene adapiforms, but this hardly solidifies her status as the eighth wonder of the world.
weberly2 2 years ago
PLEASE do not keep perpetrating the hype.
this hype only gives fodder to the ID and creation people.
just link to what the current scientific literature is saying and you should be safe.
thinkppl 2 years ago
It's not fodder, Ida actually fills in a very important gap, most people who don't understand the hype probably were never going to anyway.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I can't stand it, "Ida fills in a very important gap..." And what gap is that? Which one? Your tree is full of them! In fact there is so many pretty color crayon lines leading nowhere, it is beyond me how you call that overwhelming facts! And how is it the tree has stood that way for 200 yrs! Ida is another desparate claim, that has already been refuted by your own scientists! Ida is a beautiful detailed fossil of a lemur that drowned and was buried rapidly in a flood catastrophy, like the rest.
cathy356 2 years ago
except the vast majority of fossils are in horrible condition. complete skeletons are the exception, not the norm, as we would expect from a global flood. there is no flood layer. nothing to indicate a global flood ever happened.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ever looked down on the mountain ranges from an airplane, anywhere in the world? They all look the same, like Alot of water receded off of them, thats the top layer, the flood layer my friend, and no other layer is like that. All kinds of phenomenon can happen in a global flood, and many could have been buried near the top layer. Just think where all the birds were until they tired and had no where to land? Think about those who could not run fast, the slowest would be in the lowest..layer.
cathy356 2 years ago
water recedes off of mountains because it rains. .are you claiming no other layers show erosion? birds arent found in only the top layer. slow animals, like snails and bugs and things, are found near the top as well as lower down, and it all fits with the philogenetic tree, so much so that we can predict where certain kinds of fossils will show up. the very fact that we find multiple layers, with fossils throughout, rather than one with fossils throughout, disproves the flood.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
PROVES IT. When there is a flood of BIBLICAL proportions,there are fossils in every layer! There is somewhat calm water,whirlpools,tidal waves,undercurrents (back & forth) & etc. And when and where has it rained enough for water to flow off of the peak of every mountain? It's too bad you kids are not taught real scientific facts in determining the cause of past phenomenons of the earth. But real science is not taught, it goes against the religious philosophy they teach in the schools now-a-days.
cathy356 2 years ago
actually, all of that would only create one layer, with bones scattered throughout in no particular order, not multiple layers with signs of multiple phenomona (including asteroid impacts, droughts etc.) and bones arranged in a nested hierarchy spanning several billion years.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There are no facts which support "billions of years" A presupposition that is supported by altering real isotope ages to fit the evolutionary process. In a way, it IS one layer, divided into sediments of mud, and rock, soot and ash and everything else that randomly settled trapping drowning animals that were buried quickly and preserved. There is NO proof of any nested hierarchy anywhere! It's just how they were deposited-randomly and most in pieces mixed w/other fossil pieces. The G.C. is rare!
cathy356 2 years ago
sorry but things don't settle randomly in a flood, they settle in one graduated layer, with heavier particles toward the bottom, lighter ones toward the top. what we find is that in the ground we find those densities all mixed up with stark contrasts between them. a single globablized flood fails to adequatly explain this. and actually the proof for the nested hierarchy is eerywhere. and not just in fossils, but in dna, eer heard of ataisms and retroviruses?
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
cathy356, you have the talent for a great comedian, why don't you make your own videos?
0x8x0 2 years ago
every comment i've read on this page has managed some good points, except yours. please grow up.
weberly2 2 years ago
weberly you havent made a single point either. you just patted cathy on the back and then took a jab at 0x8x0. good job. the funny part is that neither you nor cathy have any idea what you are talking about.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
it'll be ok eric
weberly2 2 years ago
weberly2: If you think cathy356 has made any "good points" I pity you. Since when is lying and denying reality a good point?
0x8x0 2 years ago 2
got a little crush on her huh
weberly2 2 years ago
as far as billions of years. every independently verifiable dating system points to it. how did they alter isotopes? please explain.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The trouble is, there is no verifiable dating system in the millions and billions of years theory. Shortly after George Washington died, someone said "Wait! I think we evolved millions of years ago!" So now when we do have a dating science, it's abused and is a front for fitting everything into the presupposed (that makes it fraud) they call "science". You should really check out the truth of what they don't tell you. Theres more hidden agenda's than there is any truth in this darwinistic faith.
cathy356 2 years ago
once again. you need to explain. give me specific cases that proe dating systems are unreliable, or that george washingtons death is somhow connected to a darwinistic conspiracy.
TheRealEricLester 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
cathy cathy cathy, where the fuck are those hidden agenda's? WHERE? Tell us some of those hidden agendas, come on we are waiting. I hope you do not mean that conspiracy theory of yours where everyone is against your god and jesus the lord etc? Well, surprise for you, there is no god and a jesus who walks on water. Yes, there is a Bugs Bunny from Walt Disney, but there is no god around this planet.
ilsilenziodelmare 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no point in debating with Cathy, she is lost, she denies all the facts and runs and hides, let her live her life in darkness, I think it would be best for all. Do you remember the new film planet of the apes (if you have seen it) when all the truth came out Thade, just sat in a corner shaking, this is where Cathy is right now.
LozTheAtheist 2 years ago 3
"It's not fodder, Ida actually fills in a very important gap, '
it does, but not the one implied by this documentary. this fossil would fill the gap between lemurs and the common ancestor we shared with lemurs.
(check out aronra's vid on this, he know better what he's talking about) .
bu i agree. most people who do not understand the hype will never see this for what it truly is.
thinkppl 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
i understood it to be the connection between primates and other mammals, does that sound about right?
weberly2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
not entirely.
ida is a link between the lemurs and the "monkeys"
go check out AronRa 's vid on this
"Ida Know "
thinkppl 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i might should have said monkeys and mammals. in any case i don't really "get" it. i've heard time and time again there's no missing link, it's a myth, and that all species are transitional forms, etc. i realize that this fossil is in remarkable shape, and that lemurs are considered an ancient species, they are prosimian. so now these shared features would possibly bring it more into our direct line of ancestry? anyway i'll check out that video.
weberly2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
good video, thanks
weberly2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
so how do you explain the bone found in her feets that shows the transition between down-right position to upward?
drazapatos 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you mean her imposable feet thumb?
thinkppl 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fussion of Chromosome theory was proven to be a sham.
Quote: "The moon broke off the earth" ha ha ha (r u retarded?)
er? then it just hung around, never flying away
and never coliding back into the bigger chunk.
And the stuff it is made of is so rare on earth, that scientists call finds, "moon rocks" stating small meteors knocked them off the moon. ha! in fact the moon is hollow, seizmic recorders found it rang like a bell when struck by objects. We never see the dark side.
PhuqueU 2 years ago
Uh no, its observable fact that our chromosome 2 is the result of a fusion of two separate ape chromosomes.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hm, have you varified that with your own DNA? If not quit presupposing and assuming. Use science to prove scientific facts. They have labs to find that out, you know. Go varify it for yourself.
cathy356 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ok TSF, was one ape more primitive than us and the other more advanced? ...to explain our appearence? Think about it. It's the only answer if your polished cromo is true. Alien/monkey gene splice.
Look some little bitches gave my above post some thumbs down for the obvious sole purpose of wishing to hide the information. At least leave an interesting post alone you little peeon disinfo agent guideline readers. (headquarters is short handed, and hire low IQs from Eastern Europe now)
PhuqueU 2 years ago
Evolution is not directional, if higher brain function is beneficial it will be selected for.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Such was not the case with man, and became his curse.
PhuqueU 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the truth is there is not one shread of evidence suporting evolution, and whenever they are asked to produce it, they simply say, it is in the books and that you are too uneducated to understand it, that is their generic answer, even though we can indeed understand how DNA displays hard core evidence of intelligent design.
PhuqueU 2 years ago
the proof is chromosome two. we have found that chromosome two is fused together which is why we have 46 chromosomes (23 base pairs) compared to the other apes 48 (24 pairs)
that is absolute proof. just youtube or google search chromosome 2.
also what is your level of education in biology or molecular biology?
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Quote: "the proof is chromosome two. we have found that chromosome two is fused together which is why we have 46 chromosomes (23 base pairs) compared to the other apes 48 (24 pairs)"
Reply:
ha ha ha That means nothing. But the desired effect is that the reader will say to themselves, "I don't get it, but I dont want to look stupid, so I will just agree with it"
PhuqueU 2 years ago
what do you mean it means nothing? they see a fusion of chromosome 2 which is a prediction made by evolution theory. we see that prediction play out right there in genetic biology.
the effect it ought to have is THAT YOU GO LOOK IT UP. search it and study it yourself.
what you have done is say "i dont understand this so it must be nonsense"
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Quote:
"
fusion of chromosome 2 which is a prediction made by evolution theory. we see that prediction play out right there in genetic biology."
Reply:
That's like a Creationist predicting the moon will revolve around the earth, and then saying it is proof of creation.
PhuqueU 2 years ago
HOW is that ANYTHING like a creationist predicting the moon rotates the earth? the creationist will say the moon rotates because god set it there and spun it....i can show you the math of how we know the moon was broken off of our planet by being hit by another mars size planet.
the fusion of chromosome 2 prediction says that if we evolved from apes there should be a marker showing a fusion....low and behold it does...you are sad you are arguing and you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
PhuqueU 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not one link, ha! The transformation (if possible) took
millions of years, thus there should be skellital remains
of every in between stage, ...where are they???
But religious fanatics are smart getting $60,000 a year for free,
while the athiest freeloaders only get $10,000, ...
See it on Youtube: "Lautenberg Amendment"
PhuqueU 2 years ago
You realize that most christians in america accept evolution?
VenomFagnX 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
contrare most Evolutionist believe in creation, but don't want others believing in it, because they might start reading more of the scriptures, including Revelation 13:16 wherein is described the microchip implant prepared for the sheeple by the International Banksters Synagogue of Satan (Revelation 2:9)
PhuqueU 2 years ago
"And he causeth all ... to receive a mark in their right hand or foreheads, that no man might buy or sell save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.....
it is the number of a man and his number is 666."
that doesnt say computer chip. i wish i was crazy enough to make giant leaps of faith to justify my already established delusions...congratulations. you are crazy.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
See Wikipedia - Fossilization.....
MrJamieChaos 2 years ago
Just what are you replying to, little monkey offspring?
PhuqueU 2 years ago
Any and all that doubt the fossil record.. you crazy fucking cocksucker.
MrJamieChaos 2 years ago
I don't doubt the fossil record, it shows many extinct animals, and no possibility for evolution, in fact the fossil record is some of the best evidence against evolution. The weird thing is, evolutionists, athiest (sexual diviants and satanist) hate the bible because it puts down their party life style. maybe so but you satanist have no rules against lying. Which makes a debate with you tricky. So you can simply lie and say the fossil record proves your point. Where as I have to tell truth
PhuqueU 2 years ago
OH! then praise be unto thee, holiest of Followers. For surely you speak no lies, for your god bound you not to. And from your noble tongue, you must have spoken from birth till death only truth. For it is not within your heart nor your religion to do otherwise. You are a Shining example of Christianity and I thank you for it....
MrJamieChaos 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Notice the "Science Foundation" doesn't use science!
cathy356 2 years ago
how do they not use science? you know science isnt a tangible thing what you must mean is the scientific method. and yes they certainly do. if you believe they do not please explain so
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Notice they use the words, "could shed light" "may have found" and it will be like an asteroid hitting the earth! They put it together like a preview of a hollywood science fiction movie, to lie to kids! How dumb, they are saying that their research will be reknowned and famous, not the evidence for darwinistic evolution ever happening! So these scientists are only using your tax dollar to run a hoax on society and to undermine real science, just to get rich and famous!
cathy356 2 years ago
they use those words because nothing is 100% not even your belief in a god. they use those words because they JUST found the specimen. it will take some testing and then retesting by independant groups to verify the discovery.
scientists in no way are rich and famous. you have some weird view on reality. if anything the pope and the morons running churches have more money than our respectable scientists who ACTUALLY benefit our lives unlike the clergy who do nothing but burden us all.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Typical, a big show, a spotlight, a celebrity "runway" a preview of the claim to come, and no evidence! AHaha! And what is really funny is that they actually admit it's the only one found that is a true missing link! So in otherwords, they now finally have a link, but the whole chain has never been found! In otherwords, it was never a scientific theory in the first place!There was never any facts surrounding it! Sad for them, I'll bet we don't have it's DNA either.Another hoax.Embarrassing, huh?
cathy356 2 years ago
Had you actually gone to the link in the sidebar, you would've seen the evidence.
CreationistCrap 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thats just it, there is none, do you imagine evidence written there?
cathy356 2 years ago
you should be embarrassed to reveal to youtube your complete ignorance of science.
its one thing to believe in a make believe man in the sky that made you out of nothing but dont try to call scientists liars. IF there was evidence against evolution the scientist who found it would be given a nobel prize and be one of the most famous men in history. scientists are merely looking at the evidence and telling you what it says. if you want to not believe them that is your stupidity.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this isnt evidence because we cant say that this fossil had ANY kids that lived,
why this would be a beneficial mutation, even tho there are none
why would an animal back then be able to do something an animal cannot do today
and a mutation does not make a new species, is simply hurts the animal because it is not beneficial as i said before
what this is evidence for is the flood:D
there are about 90something species of lemurs and only 15 exist today
you can put the rest together:)
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
okay not every animal that dies fossilizes actually the VAST majority decay away. the specimen must die in a certain way in a certain place for it to fossilize. given how rare it is that things fossilize we also have to think how rare it would be to find THE ONLY species of this animal and that it fossilized. that would be ridiculous. there must have been many of these creatures.
wow...not all mutations are negative you have no idea what you are talking about.
how is this proof of a flood?
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
there are many mutations we see in species that give them a benefit over the others. you clearly have no education on biology so please just stop.
there is NOT ENOUGH WATER on this planet for there to have been a flood. to believe in Noahs ark shows you have no intelligence.
what do you mean an animal back then doing something an animal cant do now?
did you know that 99% of organisms that existed on this earth have gone extinct.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
name one beneficial mutation
and yes many organisms went exinct because of the flood:)
and what do you mean not enough water
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
ughh here we go...i will attempt to show a young christian evidence for KNOWN facts and he will ignore everything i say because of his belief.
beneficial mutations: sickle cell anemia protected people in africa from malaria.
anytime an organism evolves the ability to outlive a vaccine or some cure we develope that is a beneficial mutation for that species.
now there is not and COULD not be enough water on this planet to flood the whole place. the physics would be impossible.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ok for the sickle cell anemia
wouldnt that kinda being like cutting youe leg off so you cant get athletes foot? i mean seriously
and for the second one, a mutation does not make a new species, a 3 legged dog or a two headed turtle doesnt mean they arent dogs or turtles
and this would take forever to talk about the flood, but to try and make it short
there was not that much water on earth and it fell at the the time of the flood which explains why carbon dating is wacko
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
that is why black people have evolved that ability and not white people. that would not be a beneficial mutation for a race in our conditions but it is a beneficial mutation for their environment.
a mutation isnt always a new head you obviously have a flawed view of the word mutation. maybe you should go look it up.
carbon dating is NOT wacko. sure there are samples that give flawed results so we use a different method. but when all methods say the same date we know it is accurate.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
Comment removed
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
Examples of Beneficial Mutations and Natural Selection:
Adaptation to High and Low Temperatures by E. coli.
Adaptation to Growth in the Dark by Chlamydomonas.
Selection for Large Size in Chlamydomomas
Adaptation to a Low Phosphate Chemostat Environment by a Clonal Line of Yeast
Evidence of genetic divergence and beneficial mutations in bacteria after 10,000 generations
Adaptation of yeast to a glucose limited environment via gene duplications and natural selection
want more?
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
those are all adaptations not mutations
and mutations do not make a new species they are all the same kind
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
Mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organisms DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology—all aspects of its life. So a change in an organisms DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life.
an adaptation that comes about from a change in the genetic information is a mutation.
i feel like im arguing with a 15 year old who has never taken a single course on biology.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
i admit that i was wrong about the adaptations and i am sorry but adaptations do not prove evolution
evolution says that a certain kind of animal mutated into a different kind
mutations do not makenew species
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
no mutations will make a new species...an animal will be a new species once it can no longer have fertile babies with the original species...if you take billions of years and enough mutations the one specie will look and be much different then the others.
if you put the same animal on a freezing cold island and some on a desert island in a million years they would be two different species....you are arguing against well established fact and you have not given ANY evidence FOR your position.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
you gice no evidence of millions of years
BlinkxD27 2 years ago
ARE YOU SERIOUS??? you dont believe that the universe and earth has existed that long? what the hell is wrong with you? how do you justify that?
the fact that we can see stars that are billions of light years away shows how old this universe and planet is.
to see a star you are seeing the light given from that star. light takes time to travel that star could be 3 billioin light years away meaning that it took 3 billion years for that light to get to us for us to see it. we see stars is proof
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
also carbon dating shows that isotopes decay over a period of time. by testing with 14 different methods of carbon dating we can see them all show the same answer giving us the age of that material.
of course there are cases where ONE or TWO of the methods will give flawed results BUT we know when that happens and we check the OTHER methods and when ALL those methods show the SAME answer we know conclusively the age.
skitzoLSD 2 years ago 2
fossil had ANY kids that lived
Species evolve not individuals
gregrutz 2 years ago
Take this garbage and shove it up your ass! Missing link my left nut!
ChromeDove 2 years ago
that was intelligent. would you like to explain what you mean with this very obviously angry comment?
skitzoLSD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
HOAX
Matthew23and9 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Man this proves nothing
M0t0rBreath89 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LiveScience reports that "Idas unveiling was highly scripted (with some Barnum and Bailey aspects, said paleontologist Richard Kay of Duke University). More important, it can now be said the findings may well have been significantly overstated. We wont know for sure until further research is done. But if this event causes the public to distrust science and media, that distrust is well placed." (Ida Fossil Hype Went Too Far by Robert Roy Britt, May 20, 2009)
AA32m7io1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And the search continues!!
Richard Kay, a paleontologist at Duke University said, There is NO phylogenetic analysis to support the claims, and the data is cherry-picked.
Callum Ross, a paleontologist at the University of Chicago said, Their claim that this specimen should be classified as haplorhine is UNSUPPORTABLE in light of modern methods of classification.
Revolutionary Fossil Fails to Dazzle Paleontologists
Ann Gibbons, ScienceNOW, May 19, 2009
AA32m7io1 2 years ago
TROLLING!!
DerekZaleski888 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That thing is as small as the baby pig on youtube "decomposition of baby pigs" and if you watch it you can see that it decomposes completely skin AND BONE
water speeds up decomposition
volcanic eruptions melt even metal
bury a metal rod in the earth and come back in 10 years and you will be able to break it with your hands
The Titanic itself is getting eaten away from the salt water at the bottom of the ocean.
ITS ALL A CROCK HAVE AT IT PEOPLE!!
watch?v=hAhl7j6CYyQ
DarkDragon187II 2 years ago
Try actually learning about fossilization, then come back.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fossilization "so rare", "conditions are just right", and mineralization or may I say "replacing the bone with a rock substitute"
sounds like hokus pokus magic to me,
haha, what you say is so fake, have you seen it done? did you or some scientists go out and record how fossilization actually happens?
Well, no my friend, and the things that Im pointing out to you CAN be recorded and it is how it goes.
Youve been lied to your entire life.
DarkDragon187II 2 years ago
You're just trolling now.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
the last defense mechanism.....lol
DarkDragon187II 2 years ago
the last trolling mechanism..... I'd lol but you're kind of pitiful.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
This troll:
DarkDragon187II
Is a 911 conspiracy freak as well. It all fits.
csadler 2 years ago 4
"sounds like hokus pokus magic to me"
So why is it that I can find sea shells all over the Hill Country of Central Texas?
Leehofooks 2 years ago
In another reality the arch is straight.
P.S. id does not matter to me if you are.
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
First off, which do you dye pink. If it's the rug you may have a girlfriend that is in to that.
Also you may live in Houston, I hear alot of guy's wear red jeans out there.
So I fail so far to see where this is a problem.
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
I think there maybe a context problem here.
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
Does it matter?
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
I would say you can't because judgement in reserved for God not us. It is ok to say something is wrong but to say you know where someone is going is a little much.
We should focus on now, instead of guessing how God is going to judge people.
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
Yes
d2ohn 2 years ago
Hi POOPEPPER,
I'm sorry I called you stupid, it was meant as a joke.
D2OHN
d2ohn 2 years ago
Not bad....just stupid:-)
d2ohn 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is Dr. Chris Beard, of America's Carnegie Museum of Natural History also stupid?
He said: "I would be absolutely dumbfounded if it turns out to be a potential ancestor to humans."
Last time I checked, I believe he is an evolutionist.
AA32m7io1 2 years ago
And the FINAL SCORE is:
Darwin WON - Creationists LOST
No hard feelings:-)
d2ohn 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And the FINAL SCORE is: Darwin WON - Creationists LOST"
Not according to Dr. Hurum's report:
[The species] COULD represent a stem group from which later anthropoid primates evolved [the line leading to humans], but WE ARE NOT ADVOCATING THIS HERE.
The scientific reviewers of PLoS ONE asked that they tone down their original claims that the fossil was on the human evolutionary line. (The Guardian)
Remember Lucy, Piltdown, Ramapithecus, Nebraska, Java, Peking, and Neanderthal Man?
AA32m7io1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Great points, why can't people talk about this? Lets see what everyone has to say when they get a chance to look at the evidence and check it against the what we know?
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
"Remember Lucy, Piltdown, Ramapithecus, Nebraska, Java, Peking, and Neanderthal Man? "
You lying sack of shit. What a classic Tard statement this is.
csadler 2 years ago 4
Not at all over dramatic presentation is it ?why use the the annoying horror movie soundtrack and voiceover ?
mattpbent 2 years ago
creationists are easily impressed
PAKMAN52 2 years ago
Ture - and they are certainly easily goaded in knee jerk reactions as you can see from all the negative comments
mattpbent 2 years ago
I have over 50 paleo videos on fossils / geology .New lectures every month from oldest fossil club in the USA .Check out my videos , new ones added monthly !
flyingscience 2 years ago
HOLY FUCK!! Creationists GTFO!!!! Go back to your idiotic one-thousand year old book written by obviously chauvinistic old men.
ThePirateCapt 2 years ago
"Secretly studies"
WHY SO SEEKRIT?
AeonZer0 2 years ago
dun't want creationists to go poo poo on the fossil, that ruins it
blackwolf301 2 years ago
Study was done in private until enough was known about it to declare its transitional placement and status, no need to jump the gun.
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
OK thanks, I just wanted to be sure it wasn't thrown in to add some sort of unnecessary hype to this, not that it would be any less a magnificent discovery.
AeonZer0 2 years ago
"Unnecessary hype"
How much did you hear about Ida before now?
TheScienceFoundation 2 years ago
Do you think they will others really study it.
It seems to me anyone who disagrees is just pushed to the side. It may be and it may not be, but the fact remains there are people who challenge evo. bit they are ignored , not on scientific method just on the case that evo is true? Complexity and "Gene for Novelty" Spring to mind.
Also why do Atheist think that evo will disprove God. It is a science, it has no ability or authority in matters of the spirit.
kaboomgoo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is this from the Super Mario Brothers movie with Dennis Hopper? or did I just miss something?
I knew that when I was little and watched the Super Mario Brothers movie that it was real, and this just proved it!!!
HELP ME JESUS (I mean Mario and Luigi!!)
People need to watch "Decomposition of baby pigs" on youtube. I myself dont believe in fossilization because bones dont last more than 150 yeas when buried in the earth. and the sunk titanic is getting eaten up by the salt water too.
DarkDragon187II 2 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA doesn't believe in fossilization *gasp* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA comedy gold *gasp* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH poor dumb bastard
Rantandreason 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
go bury a metal rod or some nails in the ground and come back in about 5 - 10 years and you will be abel to break it
is calcium stronger than steel?
water makes decomposition faster, when forensic scientists find bodies unearthed from the ground they are not intact after 20 years.
does "replacing the bone with a rock substitute" really make sense to you?
DarkDragon187II 2 years ago
How is it a missint link? from what I hear, it has leaping primate as well as climbing primate trates which makes it compleately functional in it's enviroment. I thought a transitional form is suposed to be adapting, not fully adapted?
these are real questions I have, can anybody answer them?
hankcoca 2 years ago