stevejohnson
May 20th, 2009, 3:24 pm
Evolutionary scientists now say that a fossil discovered in two parts 26 years ago provides the missing link in the evolutionary chain of early primates to human beings. Her nickname is Ida after the six-year-old daughter of the scientist who has been studying it the last two years. Ida is supposedly a 47 million year old fossil discovered in Germany at a mile wide crater called the Messel Shale Pit near Frankfurt, Germany in 1983. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=7622711&page=1
According to reports, the fossil resembles a modern day lemur with a tail and a body the size of a raccoon, but purportedly also having later primate and human traits like opposable thumbs and fingernails instead of claws. “We realized, when I was offered this specimen that it was the most complete primate in the fossil record,” http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=7622711&page=1 the University of Oslo’s Dr. Jorn Hurum said yesterday. Before The findings went public during a news conference at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City after two years of studying to determine the fossil’s importance. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/nphotos/47-million-year-old-fossilized-primate-specimen-known-as-Ida-unveiled-at-New-Yorks-Museum-of-Natural-History/photo/19052009/6/photo/photos-n-science-47-million-year-old-fossilized-primate-specimen-known-ida.html
Despite the extraordinary claims of the headlines, Ida provides no proof of interspecies evolution. ABC News reported that it resembles a modern day lemur, not a human. According to the same story I quoted above, it made it sound like opposable thumbs were evidence of human characteristics that would explain human evolution. However, even lemurs today as well as other primates have opposable thumbs. The evidence more accurately points to Ida being an extinct lemur-like creature and nothing more.
Besides that, fossils can never prove evolution. Evolution is supposed to involve a change in living organisms. Instead, “fossils are unchanging records of dead organisms. Fossils show ‘evolution’ only if one presupposes evolution, then uses that presupposed belief to interpret the fossil. Similarities can never show evolution. If two organisms have similar structures, the only thing it proves is that the two have similar structures. One must presuppose evolution to say that the similarities are due to evolution rather than design. Furthermore, when it comes to “transitional forms,” the slightest similarities often receive great attention while major differences are ignored. If evolution were true, there would be real transitional forms. Instead, the best ‘missing links’ evolutionists can come up with are strikingly similar to organisms we see today, usually with the exception of minor, controversial, and inferred anatomical differences.” http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/05/19/ida-missing-link
Even Hurum himself says that “it would be difficult to call ‘Ida’ a direct human ancestor, but he said he is comfortable with the publicity surrounding it. ‘ That’s part of getting science out to the public, to get attention. I don’t think that’s so wrong. Maybe kids around today will ask themselves”: Who am I? Where do I come from?” This is one of the things they can look at in their textbooks for many, many years now.’” http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/Story?id=7622711&page=2 I bet he does not think that is so wrong to make this discovery public. So many are desperate to find evidence of interspecies evolution to explain the existence of human beings so that they can discredit the existence of a divine Creator or, at least, discredit the only 100% reliable record we have of how this world and its people came to be, the Bible. They are even willing to overlook genuine evidence to the contrary as to treat this evolutionary theory as settled fact and everyone who does not express belief in it as inane.
It is rather easy to prove false all of the supposed links in the evolutionary chain. All one needs to do is an open mind and some time to do a little bit of research. All of the scientific evidence found so far, when not twisted to fit a secular culture accepted theory, points to God creating the universe in six days thousands of years ago (not billions). Further proof of the mendacity of evolutionary discovers so far is here: http://www.livingwaters.com/witnessingtool/evolution.gif
According to reports, the fossil resembles a modern day lemur with a tail and a body the size of a raccoon, but purportedly also having later primate and human traits like opposable thumbs and fingernails instead of claws. “We realized, when I was offered this specimen that it was the most complete primate in the fossil record,” http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=7622711&page=1 the University of Oslo’s Dr. Jorn Hurum said yesterday. Before The findings went public during a news conference at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City after two years of studying to determine the fossil’s importance. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/nphotos/47-million-year-old-fossilized-primate-specimen-known-as-Ida-unveiled-at-New-Yorks-Museum-of-Natural-History/photo/19052009/6/photo/photos-n-science-47-million-year-old-fossilized-primate-specimen-known-ida.html
Despite the extraordinary claims of the headlines, Ida provides no proof of interspecies evolution. ABC News reported that it resembles a modern day lemur, not a human. According to the same story I quoted above, it made it sound like opposable thumbs were evidence of human characteristics that would explain human evolution. However, even lemurs today as well as other primates have opposable thumbs. The evidence more accurately points to Ida being an extinct lemur-like creature and nothing more.
Besides that, fossils can never prove evolution. Evolution is supposed to involve a change in living organisms. Instead, “fossils are unchanging records of dead organisms. Fossils show ‘evolution’ only if one presupposes evolution, then uses that presupposed belief to interpret the fossil. Similarities can never show evolution. If two organisms have similar structures, the only thing it proves is that the two have similar structures. One must presuppose evolution to say that the similarities are due to evolution rather than design. Furthermore, when it comes to “transitional forms,” the slightest similarities often receive great attention while major differences are ignored. If evolution were true, there would be real transitional forms. Instead, the best ‘missing links’ evolutionists can come up with are strikingly similar to organisms we see today, usually with the exception of minor, controversial, and inferred anatomical differences.” http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/05/19/ida-missing-link
Even Hurum himself says that “it would be difficult to call ‘Ida’ a direct human ancestor, but he said he is comfortable with the publicity surrounding it. ‘ That’s part of getting science out to the public, to get attention. I don’t think that’s so wrong. Maybe kids around today will ask themselves”: Who am I? Where do I come from?” This is one of the things they can look at in their textbooks for many, many years now.’” http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/Story?id=7622711&page=2 I bet he does not think that is so wrong to make this discovery public. So many are desperate to find evidence of interspecies evolution to explain the existence of human beings so that they can discredit the existence of a divine Creator or, at least, discredit the only 100% reliable record we have of how this world and its people came to be, the Bible. They are even willing to overlook genuine evidence to the contrary as to treat this evolutionary theory as settled fact and everyone who does not express belief in it as inane.
It is rather easy to prove false all of the supposed links in the evolutionary chain. All one needs to do is an open mind and some time to do a little bit of research. All of the scientific evidence found so far, when not twisted to fit a secular culture accepted theory, points to God creating the universe in six days thousands of years ago (not billions). Further proof of the mendacity of evolutionary discovers so far is here: http://www.livingwaters.com/witnessingtool/evolution.gif