Ida Missed Her Link to Humans (science confirms yet another creationist prediction!)

ICR News ^ | September 15, 2009 | Brian Williams, M.S.

[GodGunsGuts]

This past May, a fossil nicknamed Ida was loudly heralded by the evolutionary scientific community as the long-sought-after “missing link” that supposedly proved ape-to-human evolution. Directly following the unveiling, ICR News reported reasons why Ida, in fact, linked nothing, being merely an extinct variety of lemur.[1]

ICR News also predicted what has now occurred with Ida’s popularity campaign, stating, “After further study, however, this claim will be quietly rescinded.”[2] Ida has been surreptitiously...

[GodGunsGuts]

Yes, it was greed, corruption and a rush to judgment, further amplified by the evo-religious expectations of the Temple of Darwin faithful.

[DManA]

or even give the scientific community time to debate the issue.

The time reserved for criticism for any given theory is unlimited (except global warming but that is politics not science). There is almost as much prestige in disproving a theory as there is in coming up with one.

[GodGunsGuts]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL! And LOL again!!!

[count-your-change]

If Ida is the fossil of an extinct lemur now it was exactly the same when found, so no one notices after having the Ida fossil in their possession to study and consult over for, what? a year? two years?

But who knows? Maybe Ida can be rehabilitated if another fossil of same kind can be found with just the right “missing link” features. But it's more likely that Ida will end up in a museum's dusty basement drawer.

[farmer18th]

What, creationists predict that people will make mistakes? I predict people will use the bathroom today.

You missed the point. Using your analogy:

Scientist: "This door handle proves an evolutionary link between out-houses and indoor plumbing."
Creationist: "It proves no such thing. You haven't observed any such transition. You mistake similar parts for causality. I predict you'll eventually understand that."
Scientist: "Will you excuse me. I need to use the restroom."

[allmendream]

You, as usual, are too ignorant to even understand what you post.

An evolutionary link between lemurs and monkeys WOULD be the ancestor of all monkeys (and thus all apes, including humans); just as a evolutionary link between amphibians and reptiles would be the ancestor of all reptiles (and thus all dinosaurs and birds).

The “missing link” the paleontologist is talking about is a link between lemurs and monkeys; NOT between apes and humans.

The transitional fossil was never heralded as a link between apes and people; as your ignorant source maintains, it was heralded as a link between lemurs and monkeys.

As I said, saying this was “proof” of ape to human evolution is as ignorant and/or dishonest as claiming a transition between amphibians and reptiles was “proof” that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

Apparently you are too ignorant to understand the distinction between the two, I mean heck, only a few million years separated the two events.

[tacticalogic]

Bagged any heretics yet today?

[Caesar Soze]

If you consider the History Channel the be-all end-all of the scientific community, then I suppose the creationists did trump them on this. If you entertain a more expansive definition of the scientific community, one that includes scientists, you will find there was a lot of controversy over Darwinius from the beginning. Spend a minute or two hitting the Google and the Wiki.

[La Lydia]

“...one that includes scientists...” !!! Well said. :)

[70times7]

What, creationists predict that people will make mistakes? I predict people will use the bathroom today.

The valid point is that the find was hyped as something it was not. Of course people make mistakes, but hyping the find before validation was not an accident, it was a political ploy. Trumpeting a find as more than it is and later quietly retracting the claim is a tactic that belongs to the NY Times, not the scientific community. That is, unless there are similarities by necessity.

Regardless of what side a person holds to, intellectual dishonesty is pathetic and suggests either self centered arrogance, a lack of faith in the validity of ones own framework or both.

[70times7]

Thanks for the link.

[70times7]

Well said.

[DManA]

That is a problem with science today in general. Lots of “peer reviewed journals” a complete joke.

[metmom]

Ida who? What transitional fossil that establishes human evolution?

[metmom]

What, creationists predict that people will make mistakes?

Here we go again.

Scientists are the heroes because now science demonstrates what creationists knew all along.

[metmom]

Of course we make mistakes, they hold us to much higher standards than their ultimate answer - “Because He did it that way.”

Well? Who was initially right about the fossil?

The creationists who didn't believe that it would prove anything about human evolution? Or the *scientists* who wrongly proclaimed it with great fanfare as evidence of primate evolution, just like the other false alarms before it, like Lucy, the Hobbit fossil, etc.

*Mistake* in classifying fossils number 1,938,283,498,392.

[DManA]

Who called them heroes?

[metmom]

Of course we make mistakes, they hold us to much higher standards than their ultimate answer - “Because He did it that way.”

If *scientists* actually performed to those standards, this sort of *mistake* wouldn't be occurring nearly so often.

[metmom]

Just wow.

What a massive avoidance of the issue.

It never ceases to amaze me, the lengths evos will go to take the topic off track and deflect the attention from their total fail on this issue.

[DManA]

Try to be civil. I asked you a simple question.