Posted on 07/29/2002 6:35:04 PM PDT by Tribune7
Printer-friendly format July 26, 2002, 6:11PM
A bone to pick: Missing link is evolutionists' weakest By JEFF FARMER
It has been said that if anyone wants to see something badly enough, they can see anything, in anything. Such was the case recently, but unlike some ghostly visage of the Madonna in a coffee stain, this was a vision of our ancestral past in the form of one recently discovered prehistoric skull, dubbed Sahelanthropus tchadensis.
Papers across the globe heralded the news with great fanfare. With words like "scientists hailed" and "startling find" sprinkled into the news coverage, who couldn't help but think evolutionists had finally found their holy grail of missing links?
For those of us with more than a passing interest in such topics as, "Where did we come from? And how did we get here?," this recent discovery and its subsequent coverage fall far short of its lofty claims. A healthy criticism is in order.
Practically before the fossil's discoverer, the French paleoanthropologist Michel Brunet, could come out of the heat of a Chadian desert, a number of his evolutionary colleagues had questioned his conclusions.
In spite of the obvious national pride, Brigitte Senut of the Natural History of Paris sees Brunet's skull as probably that of an ancient female gorilla and not the head of man's earliest ancestor. While looking at the same evidence, such as the skull's flattened face and shorter canine teeth, she draws a completely different conclusion.
Of course, one might be inclined to ask why such critiques never seem to get the same front-page coverage? It's also important to point out that throughout history, various species, such as cats, have had varying lengths of canine teeth. That does not make them any closer to evolving into another species.
A Washington Post article goes on to describe this latest fossil as having human-like traits, such as tooth enamel thicker than a chimpanzee's. This apparently indicates that it did not dine exclusively on the fruit diet common to apes. But apes don't dine exclusively on fruit; rather, their diet is supplemented with insects, birds, lizards and even the flesh of monkeys. The article attempted to further link this fossil to humans by stating that it probably walked upright. Never mind the fact that no bones were found below the head! For all we know, it could have had the body of a centaur, but that would hardly stop an overzealous scientist (or reporter) from trying to add a little meat to these skimpy bones. Could it not simply be a primate similar to today's Bonobo? For those not keeping track of their primates, Bonobos (sp. Pan paniscus) are chimpanzee-like creatures found only in the rain forests of Zaire. Their frame is slighter than that of a chimpanzee's and their face does not protrude as much. They also walked upright about 5 percent of the time. Sound familiar?
Whether it is tooth enamel, length of canines or the ability to walk upright, none of these factors makes this recent discovery any more our ancestral candidate than it does a modern-day Bonobo.
So why does every new fossil discovery seem to get crammed into some evolutionary scenario? Isn't it possible to simply find new, yet extinct, species? The answer, of course, is yes; but there is great pressure to prove evolution.
That leads us to perhaps the most troubling and perplexing aspect of this latest evolutionary hoopla. While on one hand sighting the evolutionary importance of this latest discovery, a preponderance of these articles leave the notion that somehow missing links are not all that important any more.
According to Harvard anthropologist Dan Lieberman, missing links are pretty much myths. That might be a convenient conclusion for those who have been unable to prove evolution via the fossil record. Unfortunately for them, links are absolutely essential to evolution. It is impossible for anything to evolve into another without a linear progression of these such links.
The prevailing evolutionary view of minute changes, over millions of years, is wholly inadequate for the explanation of such a critical piece of basic locomotion as the ball-and-socket joint. Until such questions can be resolved, superficial similarities between various species are not going to prove anything. No matter how bad someone wants to see it.
Farmer is a professional artist living in Houston. He can can be contacted via his Web site, www.theglobalzoo.com
I haven't studied every post in this thread, but I haven't called you any names. Nor have I behaved with arrogance toward you.
I find the idea of a Creator not only more spiritually satisfying, but also more logical when I take in the beauty of Creation.
Fine with me.
Personally, I could give a crap about the circumference of a bowl.
Nor I. The issue comes up in the context of scriptural inerrancy, and I think that's what you were getting at in your post. I didn't bother will the other issues you raised, like the shape of the earth, which you claimed [or quoted others as claiming] was correctly described in scripture. I stuck with pi, because it's so simple, and I always find it a difficult point for advocates of the scriptural inerrancy position.
they have achieved a degree of immunity to what most people call logic...shame too!
Oh, come on! Is that helping at all? Speak for yourself!
Wouldn't you feel better expressing your own thoughts? Do you reall think you have nothing to offer to the discussion? Do you really think any subsequent shunning, ignoring, or even ridicule would be any worse than what you get now?
Allow me to point out that even if the worst happened, you would at least have earned it yourself. Come on, try again...
That's really all you're trying to do here, i.e. put ammunition into the hands of people who will ultimately be fighting these evo wars in courtrooms, school board meetings etc. etc. Ultimately, this is a political issue and will be settled at ballot boxes and in courtrooms. You're not going to educate committed evolutionists.
the evo thought train comes apart---floats--crashes if you UNDER--inform(drug)--doctrinate yourself.
OVER-exact-informed(drugged)--doctrinated--TUNED and the evo trains all run 'on time'---just right!
EVOtearalien 'time'/SCIENCE---convergence!
Actually, it has grown on me. When I first saw it in an Ann Coulter article it jarred me. Then I flashed back to childhood, remembering the childish name calling that takes place at that age. If course today, children use words that are much more vulgar than “penis head,” having been exposed to every imaginable vulgarity practically from birth. But the term “penis head” has a certain quaint ring to it. It is name calling from a more innocent age.
And … in view of the ad-hominem attacks that are generally made on the intelligence, and even the sanity of people who have faith in a Creator, it fits. Does it bother you?
Honesty is always to be preferred to the alternative. Welcome to the club.
I find the idea of a Creator not only more spiritually satisfying, but also more logical when I take in the beauty of Creation.
Good for you. We don't have to agree to discuss the ideas involved.
So, to continue, do you, because of your faith, reject out of hand the further idea that God could have created us through the mechanism of evolution? (Which appears to be the subject of this thread).
Or, tenatively going a step further, that God placed the fossils in the ground to play a joke on us? That the light we see in our telescopes was created some 6000 years ago to fool us into believing in an old universe?
Feel free to jump in and agree or disagree with anything you find particularly heartwarming or objectionable. Be warned that we often have to deal with the bizarre postings of medved, Gore3000, and f.Christian and so are not likely to be dissuaded from our views without strong evidence and extensive rational discourse. ;^)
That seems like a rational thought, well expressed, and completely understandable.
However, you followed it up with the usual drivel. You can't make me read your mind and, as funny as doing the Shatner voice for your posts is, it gets old and tiring.
Now, in response to the thought itself - true. But if you show up and slap such bizarre posts on the thread, who are you communicating with? Who do you think you are persuading? You can't frame a discussion of quantum mechanics in baby-speak, so why would you think this would be any different?
Methinks you mistake comments upon the intelligence of creationists with attacks upon people of faith. T'ain't the case. Many of us evolutionists are firm believers in the Almighty. However, we refuse to reject the evidence that the life around us is the product of descent with modification. And, truthfully, we don't see any contradictions in these views.
Sweetie, medved is not a creationist as most people define the term. He believes that the Earth once orbited Saturn and that humanity is the result of some sort of genetic tinkering by a person or persons unknown. His "theories" have earned him quite a reputation throughout the world wide web -- there are entire websites devoted to him.
Changing--morphing words-meaning-reality...
the TRUTH/science via your 'logic-reason' to your fantasy-bias world-bs/IDEOLOGY---LIBERALISM/EVOLUTION is called psychosis!
These threads are casebook studies for "Morton's Demon Syndrome."
Here's the latest I've found: Debating Creationists: Ted Holden .
I think it's the other way around. Unless you're a LaMarkian of course.
Since I don't personally know of one good solid documented supernatural event, you'll excuse me if I assume until one comes along that whatever may be lacking in the explanation for a thing, it's probably not a violation of the laws of physics.
I believe you are correct. Most people find nothing to "debate" and the remainder are ill-equipped to discuss the matter at all. That tends to leave the Creationist side of the discussion to the invincibly ignorant (Gore3000), the fantasists (medved), or the deliberately uncommunicative (f.christian). The random post insertion by the remainder are mostly just to state that they are here and not going to be persuaded from their religious views - although why they insist in mixing their faith with science I couldn't say.
You need a translator---designated thinker/guide(inner child)!
Go to the beach and toss stones in the ocean!
BWAHAHAHA!
So, to continue, do you, because of your faith, reject out of hand the further idea that God could have created us through the mechanism of evolution? (Which appears to be the subject of this thread).
I believe micro-evolution to be scientific and rational. I believe macro-evolution to be a fraud as a science, and a danger as a belief. I don't reject that God could have created us through the mechanism of evolution, I think God could have done anything. I just don't see his NEED to. I.e. a hummingbird made "poof" by a word, or generated over time, is still a miraculous creation that requires SOMETHING INTELLIGENT at it's origin. (I feel the same way about mangoes and a host of other wonder-ful things.)
Or, tenatively going a step further, that God placed the fossils in the ground to play a joke on us?
But even in a mere 6000 years a lot of things have died. Why shouldn't there be fossils? There haven't been any non-embellished "missing links" found however, never mind the bazillions of fossils there should be were macro-evolution true.
That the light we see in our telescopes was created some 6000 years ago to fool us into believing in an old universe?
Besides the theory that the speed of light is slowing down, just because that's the speed of light, it doesn't mean they didn't just come on one day. I think our minds are relatively puny in the scope of the size of the Universe, and I honestly lose less than little sleep on these questions.
A lot of speculation is out there over even the exact nature of our Universe. There's the big ball theory, the mirror theory... personally it's as important to me as the circumference of a bowl. I'm more interested in how I fit into that Universe, how I obey all it's laws... especially the ones I can have control over, the "love your neighbor" one comes to mind.
Feel free to jump in and agree or disagree with anything you find particularly heartwarming or objectionable. Be warned that we often have to deal with the bizarre postings of medved, Gore3000, and f.Christian and so are not likely to be dissuaded from our views without strong evidence and extensive rational discourse. ;^)
EVOLUTION=DEATH---!---Evolution is a tool of THE ENEMY!!! Be his ADVERSARIES!---OR---be his VICTIMS---!!!
(But only because you suggested it.)
However, my preferred last words on the subject?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.