Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Science → 47 million year old 'missing link'

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

الحبيب من يشبه اكثر؟؟؟
by akay
Today at 01:05 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
Today at 07:37 AM
New Britain
Yesterday at 09:26 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
June 18, 2025, 09:24 PM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 11:23 PM
Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 10:20 PM
News From Syria
June 17, 2025, 05:58 PM
Muslim grooming gangs sti...
June 17, 2025, 10:47 AM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
June 13, 2025, 06:51 AM
ماذا يحدث هذه الايام؟؟؟.
by akay
June 02, 2025, 10:25 AM
What happens in these day...
June 02, 2025, 09:27 AM
What's happened to the fo...
June 01, 2025, 10:43 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: 47 million year old 'missing link'

 (Read 15182 times)
  • Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #30 - May 24, 2009, 11:04 AM
    Whatever it is, it comes as continues to expand our understanding of evolution , particularly as it is 47 million years old!  Wow, cant believe its still around after all that time!
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #31 - May 24, 2009, 11:19 AM
    Oh sure. It's a good thing in its own right. It just bugs me the way the media hype it out of all proportion and don't even bother to get the facts straight. They just play into the hands of creationist idiots with stunts like this.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #32 - May 24, 2009, 11:37 AM
    I am surprised that they have got it this wrong though, particularly when these claims are made in broadsheet newspapers.  Its either sensationalist to point of lieing, or complete ignorance, in either case its downright irresponsible. 

    Just goes to show how much other crap we are fed with, without ever realising it!
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #33 - May 26, 2009, 05:05 PM
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nk9nwohqts
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #34 - May 26, 2009, 06:03 PM
    Without wings, I wonder how Ida eventually ended up in Ethiopia where our first human ancestors were found?
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #35 - May 26, 2009, 09:09 PM
    I just watch the hour long BBC 1 documentary with Sir David Attenborough and it was very good.

    They are not saying that the fossil is a link between humans and apes (evidence of which already exists) but of the human branch of primates and the wider animal kingdom.

  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #36 - May 27, 2009, 12:08 AM
    Hmm. That's a better description but from the paper I read and some other articles it seems this fossil is not on our ancestral line but a side branch, so the documentary is still hyping things a bit, probably because they thought that if they didn't nobody would watch the show because who cares about a dead lemur?  grin12
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #37 - May 27, 2009, 12:17 AM
    Quote from: IsLame on May 26, 2009, 06:03 PM
    Without wings, I wonder how Ida eventually ended up in Ethiopia where our first human ancestors were found?


    Well?  Lufthansa or British Airways?
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #38 - May 29, 2009, 03:03 PM
    Well apparently there are different schools of thought in archaeology so there might be more to this than we think *shrugs*
    ~My story~
    ~Collection of unethical hadiths/surahs~
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #39 - May 30, 2009, 02:16 PM
    One for Sojournlemous & Os

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ksh5y/Uncovering_Our_Earliest_Ancestor_The_Link/

    BBC documentary written and narrated by David Attenborough on IDA, watching it as I write..
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #40 - May 31, 2009, 08:38 AM
    Quote from: osmanthus on May 24, 2009, 11:19 AM
    Oh sure. It's a good thing in its own right. It just bugs me the way the media hype it out of all proportion and don't even bother to get the facts straight. They just play into the hands of creationist idiots with stunts like this.

    Maybe it's a creationist conspiracy!
    They infiltrate the media in order to spread hyped half-incorrect discoveries about evolution so they have material to bash Cheesy
    Do not look directly at the operational end of the device.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #41 - May 31, 2009, 08:51 AM
    Actualy that's precisely the sort of crap that they would do if they had a chance.  whistling2
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #42 - May 31, 2009, 11:38 AM
    Quote from: IsLame on May 26, 2009, 06:03 PM
    Without wings, I wonder how Ida eventually ended up in Ethiopia where our first human ancestors were found?

    Ethiopia? Where did you get that from. Ida was found in Germany which was in the approx posn of Sicily today, 47 mil yrs ago, and then what with plate tektonics an' all....
    Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #43 - May 31, 2009, 11:48 AM
    Quote from: sojournerlumus on May 31, 2009, 11:38 AM
    Ethiopia? Where did you get that from. Ida was found in Germany which was in the approx posn of Sicily today, 47 mil yrs ago, and then what with plate tektonics an' all....

    What I was saying was how Ida over generations turned human, and Ethiopia was where the first human was found i.e. how did she get across continents & oceans between Germany to Ethiopia, without wings or fins Huh?

    Unless SJs hypotheisis that Ida is on a different branch to humans is true..

    According to the documentary Ida was a "monkey lemur" - with traits of both
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #44 - May 31, 2009, 11:59 AM
    Hi Islame, have you just deleted your last post? I can't find it again.
    Anyway, alot's happened in 47 ma. Continents have moved, formed and reformed; sea levels have risen and fallen continually; the climate, both locally and globally has lurched to extremes of hot and cold many times; species have continually evolved, branched, died out, moved around (actively or passively), etc. There are many imponderables but we can draw inferences from what little we do find of individual species, enough to regard the sum total as evidence of the process.
    The irony is that Ida herself probably wasn't anyone's ancestor. If, as has been deduced from forensics (as seen), she probably died young and without issue.
    Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #45 - May 31, 2009, 12:07 PM
    Just a note: 6 million years ago the Mediterranean was bone dry. That's how much things can change over time.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #46 - May 31, 2009, 06:55 PM
    Quote from: sojournerlumus on May 31, 2009, 11:59 AM
    The irony is that Ida herself probably wasn't anyone's ancestor. If, as has been deduced from forensics (as seen), she probably died young and without issue.

    I suppose that is perhaps part the answer.  Ida's 5th cousin who was identical to her but lived out in Ethiopia, could have been our ancestor.  Ida died, so we know for a fact she wasnt, but there is no reason to believe there were not others like her spread across the globe.
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #47 - May 31, 2009, 07:23 PM
    Quote from: IsLame on May 31, 2009, 06:55 PM
    I suppose that is perhaps part the answer.  Ida's 5th cousin who was identical to her but lived out in Ethiopia, could have been our ancestor.  Ida died, so we know for a fact she wasnt, but there is no reason to believe there were not others like her spread across the globe.


    The species that Ida belonged to was not a direct ancestor of the human race, she's like our great great auntie - related but not directly.   As for the media hype, they - even the broadsheets - love the term missing link for its sensationalism. 
    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #48 - May 31, 2009, 07:50 PM
    Quote from: Cheetah on May 31, 2009, 07:23 PM
    The species that Ida belonged to was not a direct ancestor of the human race, she's like our great great auntie - related but not directly.   As for the media hype, they - even the broadsheets - love the term missing link for its sensationalism. 

    The Attenborough documentary does not come to that conclusion, but it does hint at that Ida may be our great Auntie, but more likely to be our great n+1 grandfather
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #49 - May 31, 2009, 09:11 PM
    It's made for tv. If they say "Hey look, we found a dead lemur!" nobody in the general public is going to give a rat's.  Wink
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #50 - June 01, 2009, 03:20 PM
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri20shBEsls
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #51 - June 01, 2009, 03:37 PM
    If you really want to know what our ancestors got up to, watch Mel Brooks "History of the World" Part One - Our Fourfathers.
    Strange actually, I only had one father.
    Still, that's Jewish humour for you.
    Oy vay.



    There will be no white flag above our door
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #52 - June 02, 2009, 10:25 PM
    Quote from: osmanthus on May 31, 2009, 09:11 PM
    It's made for tv. If they say "Hey look, we found a dead lemur!" nobody in the general public is going to give a rat's.  Wink


    You can't just accuse it of being made for tv. That isn't a good reason to suppose that they're lying. Have you watched the BBC documentary? It is mostly a report from the actual team that studied the fossil. The team was selected for their excellent and relevant knowledge. Your not arguing with them are you?
    The unlived life is not worth examining.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #53 - June 02, 2009, 10:37 PM
    I've read the original paper on this fossil. In that they said it was not on our direct ancestral line, but from a very early branching. So if the documentary says otherwise.................... 
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #54 - June 02, 2009, 10:45 PM
    I'll clarify that, James. You said the doco was mostly a report from the team. That means some bits of it weren't. Those are the bits I suspect were "made for tv", and I suspect this bit is one of them:

    Quote from: IsLame on May 31, 2009, 07:50 PM
    The Attenborough documentary does not come to that conclusion, but it does hint at that Ida may be our great Auntie, but more likely to be our great n+1 grandfather


    The reason I suspect that is because it contradicts what the team have written in their official description of the fossil.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #55 - June 02, 2009, 10:47 PM
    Ida has lemur-like AND ape-like features. They predicted that it is BOTH our ancestors AND lemur's ancestors. That means Ida is our great grandmother, not our great aunt.
    The unlived life is not worth examining.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #56 - June 02, 2009, 10:49 PM
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0005723
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #57 - June 02, 2009, 11:01 PM
    Quote from: J4m3z on June 02, 2009, 10:47 PM
    Ida has lemur-like AND ape-like features. They predicted that it is BOTH our ancestors AND lemur's ancestors. That means Ida is our great grandmother, not our great aunt.


    No, it doesn't.  It predicts that Ida could be either our great grandmother or our great aunt.  At the moment, the evidence is leaning towards great aunt. 
    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #58 - June 02, 2009, 11:03 PM
    From the linked paper:

    Quote
    Note that Darwinius masillae, and adapoids contemporary with early tarsioids, could represent a stem group from which later anthropoid primates evolved, but we are not advocating this here, nor do we consider either Darwinius or adapoids to be anthropoids.


    and:

    Quote
    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.

    Darwinius masillae is important in being exceptionally well preserved and providing a much more complete understanding of the paleobiology of an Eocene primate than was available in the past.


    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: 47 million year old 'missing link'
     Reply #59 - June 02, 2009, 11:08 PM
    Quote from: osmanthus on June 02, 2009, 10:45 PM
    I'll clarify that, James. You said the doco was mostly a report from the team. That means some bits of it weren't. Those are the bits I suspect were "made for tv", and I suspect this bit is one of them:

    The reason I suspect that is because it contradicts what the team have written in their official description of the fossil.

    No, it was the experts who were doing the hinting.  However I concede that it may have been 'cut' well.
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »