Missing link found by Norwegian scientist

[jake4130]

First bit of encouragement I have even seen here. Thanks for that.

 

[TheBear]

Back on topic.....


The discovery of a 47 million year old specimen...

 

[Hespera]

for my opinion its too much emphasis on what is or isnt a possible human ancestor.

for those with some interest in paleo, its going to be obvious. for the rest, what is the point?

 

[TheBear]

My only objection is the use of the term 'missing link'. It's very misleading and causes confusion among those not familiar with paleontology. A better term would be, "another piece of the puzzle".

 

[Hespera]

Sure dont like the term "missing link" either.

 

[apwood]

I thought god was supposed to be all powerful and everywhere, and can make something positive out of the worst of situations. I guess that's not the case.

You haven’t studied God it seems, probably do not even know what God is, have never experienced God (no if's here) - you probably don't even care, and more so, you probably don't even understand your side of things seeing you're making absurd statements like that. If that was harsh, I suppose it is what it is. Do not feel too bad though, because you're not the only one that can write such little statements and spew it into total nonsense and misunderstanding on your part. I can name you over 100 personal experiences in my own life in which absolutely horrible things have happened and each one has something good. Anything - cancer, death, injury, pain, suffering. All of these I've either experienced myself or have seen others suffer with, yet somehow something good does indeed come out of them and I would be than happy to explain this to you if you would be willing to clear your mind of any static and listen openly.

And then above you say "This is yet another discovery with confirms and supports evolution". We already know evolution is a true as it's observed through mutation, natural selection, and change in species. Can you measure the electric current that goes to the light bulb in your living room? Evolution is no different. This fossil isn't "proof" of anything, because we already know evolution is proved. I suppose if you want to believe this proves the proven, then whatever makes you feel good.

Perhaps you should study God...no, wait. Figure out what you even you believe first, then study God, then come back and make such statements. The evidence is in what you've wrote.

Cute, but not in my eyes.

 

[TheBear]

You haven’t studied God it seems, probably do not even know what God is, have never experienced God (no if's here) - you probably don't even care, and more so, you probably don't even understand your side of things seeing you're making absurd statements like that. If that was harsh, I suppose it is what it is. Do not feel too bad though, because you're not the only one that can write such little statements and spew it into total nonsense and misunderstanding on your part. I can name you over 100 personal experiences in my own life in which absolutely horrible things have happened and each one has something good. Anything - cancer, death, injury, pain, suffering. All of these I've either experienced myself or have seen others suffer with, yet somehow something good does indeed come out of them and I would be than happy to explain this to you if you would be willing to clear your mind of any static and listen openly.

And then above you say "This is yet another discovery with confirms and supports evolution". We already know evolution is a true as it's observed through mutation, natural selection, and change in species. Can you measure the electric current that goes to the light bulb in your living room? Evolution is no different. This fossil isn't "proof" of anything, because we already know evolution is proved. I suppose if you want to believe this proves the proven, then whatever makes you feel good.

Perhaps you should study God...no, wait. Figure out what you even you believe first, then study God, then come back and make such statements. The evidence is in what you've wrote.

Cute, but not in my eyes.

First, don't make assumptions about me. You don't know me.

Second, this thread isn't about me.


Just stick to the topic, refrain from personal attacks, and we'll get along just fine.

 

[apwood]

First, don't make assumptions about me. You don't know me.

Second, this thread isn't about me.


Just stick to the topic, refrain from going to personal attacks, and we'll get along just fine.

If it "proves" evolution to you or other people, then that's fine. If you want to proclaim it as a "missing" piece, then fine. If scientists can find fossils that help them connect one thing to another then great. If not, no big deal. Evolution has been proven for a long time now. I am afraid the media is just over-hyping this and nothing else.

This so-called discovery is as equal to us finding an apple that's more redder than another and presenting it to the public as if it's meaningful because of it's darker and unique color, while in the end apples are apples and nothing changes the fact that apples are apples.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution has been proven for a long time now.

Evolution can take a hike.

It makes a mockery of God and His perfect Creation.

 

[TheBear]

If it "proves" evolution to you or other people, then that's fine.

It doesn't "prove" anything. "Proofs" are for alcohol and mathematics, not science. Not once have I used the words 'proof' or 'prove'. I don't know where all this "proof" talk is coming from. Perhaps you should explain yourself. I used the words, 'confirms and supports'. Do you have a problem with that? If so, explain why.

 

[Baggins]

What doesn't happen is a worm, no matter how much time is given, will not change or morph into something else.

Isn't that what I just said? A worm will only produce slight modifications of itself.

What you seem to have trouble grasping is that you are just a modified worm.

Once you have understood that you will understand that nothing ever had to produce an offspring that was anything other than a tiny modification of itself in order for you to stand their looking at a worm 700 million years after you shared a common ancestor.

Got it now?

 

[USincognito]

See thats why I hate that term. Adaptation explains it much better. A species can adapt to its environment but cannot evolve or morph or change into another species.

Assertion without supporting evidence, which makes me ask...

Why is it, that because I believe a species can adapt to its environment, I automatically have to believe that it can evolve to a new species? I see a distinct difference between the two.[/QUOTE]

...what evidence do you have that they cannot as you are asserting?

 

[Honkytnkmn]

Isn't that what I just said? A worm will only produce slight modifications of itself.

What you seem to have trouble grasping is that you are just a modified worm.

Once you have understood that you will understand that nothing ever had to produce an offspring that was anything other than a tiny modification of itself in order for you to stand their looking at a worm 700 million years after you shared a common ancestor.

Got it now?

I got it before. I just don't believe it.

exactly where in my posts did I say one species had another species?

But at some point it stops being a worm? Or am I wrong there too?

 

[Honkytnkmn]

Assertion without supporting evidence, which makes me ask...

Why is it, that because I believe a species can adapt to its environment, I automatically have to believe that it can evolve to a new species? I see a distinct difference between the two.

...what evidence do you have that they cannot as you are asserting?[/quote]

Are you asking me to prove a negative? I can't. Other than the fact that we don't witness it because it takes too long to happen which is a cop out. If it were the case we would have enough evidence to put everything together and watch it like a cartoon. Frame by frame. The earth would be riddled with failure after failure of every single species on the planet till it was right. We would see birds with solid bones and feathers. we might see land animals with hollow bones. We would find so many different creatures probably everything you can imagine as nature tried to sort out exactly what the best method for survival is.

What do we see, a shoulder bone here, a few teeth there, a horse hoof or two.

Tell me where are the fossils?

 

[fated]

So if God prompted Adam (yes, Adam --- not Moses) to write Genesis 1, and Adam wrote it wrong, you think God just said, "Oh well, I'll go ahead and preserve the mistake. No one will notice."

John gives us an excellent account of this in the Revelation. And, try as he might... I feel as if he left out a massive amount of detail that Bible scholars would have loved to study today. Why he chose to include certain things and not include others we could say, is a matter of the Holy Spirit, this is also true of the Gospels, especially regarding their incongruities.

 

[AV1611VET]

John gives us an excellent account of this in the Revelation. And, try as he might... I feel as if he left out a massive amount of detail that Bible scholars would have loved to study today. Why he chose to include certain things and not include others we could say, is a matter of the Holy Spirit, this is also true of the Gospels, especially regarding their incongruities.

Left out --- as in:

1. God forgot to include it?
2. God let it go the way of decay, and it got lost?
3. God just sat and did nothing --- it was up to John to provide the Documentation?

 

[fated]

Isn't that what I just said? A worm will only produce slight modifications of itself.

What you seem to have trouble grasping is that you are just a modified worm.

Once you have understood that you will understand that nothing ever had to produce an offspring that was anything other than a tiny modification of itself in order for you to stand their looking at a worm 700 million years after you shared a common ancestor.

Got it now?

Actually, this is the most tenuous part of evolution, the macro-evolution, and the portion that many persons believe God may have entered into directly as an intervention. One cannot genuinely ignore the real possibility here, especially considering the complexity of new parts. There aren't any good records of such evolution, that is, we cannot see it in fossil records nor have we witnessed it.

That said, I think that macro-evolution has a very solid case, especially given all the dormant DNA our genetic material carries. This genetic material was or is probably more useful to less complex creatures than ourselves. So, you could say that we are currently using macro-evolution in working with bacterium, but this isn't as precise as would be required, to make a good counter, as bacterium are not all that complex, or, one could say, comparatively complex.

This is a challenge to many Christians, who might see our own creation at the hands of God as elevating our dignity, but no, it was Jesus Christ who elevated our dignity to its supernatural level. Even one from another religion would see the logic here, however, that it is because we belong to the group of creatures with whom God had some sort of relationship. It is also through this connection that primates, receive there obvious elevated dignity, and in a different manner, that our domesticated animal get theirs (our meticulous care (creation) for them).

 

[fated]

Left out --- as in:

1. God forgot to include it?
2. God let it go the way of decay, and it got lost?
3. God just sat and did nothing --- it was up to John to provide the Documentation?

John didn't include information about the colors of everything, or of the people, and his numbers are only estimates, it is unclear how the people were organized (were they in groups or lines or just a mass), how the altar was arranged or what it looked like, the backdrop to huge swathes of the situation is left out and in other parts appears to be simply 'the Earth.'

These are details which he may have even had conversations with other Christians about, but which are not documented in Revelation. These details would almost assuredly provide additional insight into the experience itself. They aren't in there because John wrote down the Revelation 'with God.' But, he was only human, how do express things like that, have it be an accessible literary work, and be understandable for thousands of years?

 

[AV1611VET]

They aren't in there because John wrote down the Revelation 'with God.'

Either that --- or --- as God put it:

The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.

And they aren't there because John wrote down the Revelation 'with God'???

What on earth does that mean?

But, he was only human, how do express things like that, have it be an accessible literary work, and be understandable for thousands of years?

That's easy --- God took care of all of that.

Do you realize that of all the translations in existence, the King James is the easiest to understand?

 

[Toclafane]

Either that --- or --- as God put it:And they aren't there because John wrote down the Revelation 'with God'???

What on earth does that mean?That's easy --- God took care of all of that.

Do you realize that of all the translations in existence, the King James is the easiest to understand?

Nope, it's not the easiest to understand.
It may be for YOU, but not for everyone.