Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Uhm, yes "missing link" is a woefully outdated term that hasn't been used in evolutionary science for decades. Anyone using it is definitely showing their ignorance of evolutionary theory, as it does not accurately reflect the way biologists and paleontologists think about fossils.
Sadly, some journalists have apparently decided to pull the term out of the scrapheap and use it as a sort of catch-all for "new fossil".
Uhm, yes "missing link" is a woefully outdated term that hasn't been used in evolutionary science for decades. Anyone using it is definitely showing their ignorance of evolutionary theory, as it does not accurately reflect the way biologists and paleontologists think about fossils.
The idea of evolution being a linear progression with "steps" or "links" is also a common mistake made by the uneducated. These days, evolution isn't viewed as a tree - more like a dense, tangled bush.
Sorry MrBlueSky, but "missing link" is used all the time by believers in Evolution. It appears those who can't see this are the one's showing their ignorance of evolutionary beliefs made by other scientist. From Guardian Newspaper Thrusday, May 21, 2009. Scientists hail ' stunning' fossil, nicknamed Ida, claiming it to be a "MISSING LINK". John Hurum of the Natural History Museum in Oslo Norway believes the fossil creature is the closets thing to a direct ancestor. Independent experts are sceptical of it being a missing link.
The term "MISSING LINK" is used by scientist all the time.
Last edited by Campbell34; 08-22-2009 at 01:44 PM..
Sorry MrBlueSky, but "missing link" is used all the time by believers in Evolution. It appears those who can't see this are the one's showing their ignorance of evolutionary beliefs made by other scientist. From Guardian Newspaper Thrusday, May 21, 2009. Scientists hail ' stunning' fossil, nicknamed Ida, claiming it to be a "MISSING LINK". John Hurum of the Natural History Museum in Oslo Norway believes the fossil creature is the closets thing to a direct ancestor. Independent experts are sceptical of it being a missing link.
The term "MISSING LINK" is used by scientist all the time.
Good job there quoting a journalist's headline and text to counter the claim that "missing link" is used by journalists and not scientists...
You see, I knew Evolution was false because of the Bible, science is just beginning to learn that evolution is false because they ignored the Bible. Yet, given enought time, science is starting to see the error of their way.
In translation:
'You're decieved because you're not accepting that my faith is 'the only correct way'.
Did I get that right?
:EDIT: Actually, I *am* going to add to this post. I have a challenge for you.
Produce a physical piece of archaeological evidence that can reliably be proven accurate and substantial that the first man and woman (Adam and Eve) existed as depicted in the Bible.
Or better yet, produce physical evidence of the same quality that disproves evolution in general.
And I thought that you respected creation "scientists" You certainly quote them often enough..It sort of looks like this thread backfired on you doesn't it?
Evolution in a linear fashion has never been a core belief, and as I've pointed out to you in the past humans did not evolve from apes, but are one of the seven species of ape. Just the fact that you are attempting to use a 7 million year old fossil to buttress your young earth opinion makes your biblical belief contradictory....You say you do not accept the age of the fossil, but accept the rest?
In any case you don't seem to even accept the bible on the age of the earth...You say 15,000 years which is more than double what most think the bible says....Perhaps you are the only person able to interpret the bible correctly, is that it?
It was Linear Evolution that was used as evidence during the Scopes Monkey trial. Four scientist were able to convince the jury that the Piltdown Man, Java man, and others showed the progression to where we are today. Of course, that evidence was revealed as nonsense after the trial. Yet it was enought to win the case.
Linear Evolution was assumed by many for years after that, and they even had pictures in books that suggested that man went from a small primate monkey like creature, to modern man. However, that belief was also exposed as just more nonsense.
Now scientist from Norway who are led by Jorn Hurum are claiming once again they have found the missing link, and they call her Ida. The BS never ends. Of course this discovery will go the way of Piltdown man, and Java man, and all the others.
So you have some scientist still running after rainbows, and then you have men like Henry Gee editor of Nature magazine saying that the old idea of a missing link (IS BUNK). And the very idea of the missing link, always shaky, is now completely untenable.
It was Linear Evolution that was used as evidence during the Scopes Monkey trial. Four scientist were able to convince the jury that the Piltdown Man, Java man, and others showed the progression to where we are today. Of course, that evidence was revealed as nonsense after the trial. Yet it was enought to win the case.
Yes. The gist of it was correct. Evolution was a fact then just as it is now. They just didn't know as much. Believe it or not NEW STUFF has been learned and the details have been refined in the past 70 years. That's how science works, sparky.. unlike you and your cult who still believes the same shiite from 4000 years ago dreamt up by ignorant desert goatherders.
So you have some scientist still running after rainbows, and then you have men like Henry Gee editor of Nature magazine saying that the old idea of a missing link (IS BUNK). And the very idea of the missing link, always shaky, is now completely untenable.
In order to have an absolutely complete record of recent human evolution you would need to have tens of thousands of generations represented in the fossil record. When you consider the fact that it's actually a rare event when a plant or animal dies in circumstances that are ideal for preserving the remains as a fossil then you can understand that it's often difficult to connect the lineage from one particular ancient fossil to one that's more recent. Nevertheless we do have a substantial fossil record for human beings as well as most other living things so your claim that the theory of evolution is collapsing is completely false. Every year more fossil material is added to the hundreds of thousands that already exist as new excavations and discoveries are made. Journalists do a poor job of explaining this to the public because they tend to use phrases to grab our attention and often exaggerate the importance of a particular discovery before scientists have even had a chance to seriously evaluate it.
It would be wonderful if every single one of my ancestors going back to the beginning of life itself would have been preserved as a fossil because all of our questions would be answered and we could see exactly how life evolved and all of the twists and turns that evolution took before the rise of modern man. Unfortunately we'll never have a complete record but like it or not the evidence for evolution grows stronger all the time as more discoveries are made and your hangup about the phrase "missing link" is really of no importance at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
