Darwin Validated?: Missing link found?
5/20/2009 08:39:00 PM | Author: fadzly
What is missing link?
Missing link is the link that have been missing or the species that have missing in the line of an evolution of a man or just a fact for the Darwin's theory to be true. The group of scientists claim that they have discovered “Ida,” a 47-million-year-old fossil that has been proclaimed the “missing link” in connecting human skeletal structure to early mammals.
Scientists found it in Messel Pit, Germany. They found out that she is about twenty times older than most fossils related to human evolution. What makes Ida so special? she has certain undeniable human characteristics such as forward facing eyes and even an opposable thumb.
What makes me post this article? Is this really a 'missing link' or is this just another plain species of monkeys that have gone extinct? What proof do they have of it being 46 million years old? Maybe we're all just too naive and believe whatever scientists claim because they're suppose to be 'educated' and 'know' things. "The "Darwin validated" headline from all over the news (you can just google it) makes it sound like evolutionary biologists were waiting for this one fossil to prove that evolution is true -- which is not the case."
The words "Darwin validated" makes it sound like they've been waiting a long time for just this fossil to show up so that the Darwinists could laugh and say, "We were a part of the animal kingdom afterall! We're nothing but animals that have evolved over millions and billions of years!" Shouldn't the other aspects be considered? What if that fossil is nothing but a fake, just like all the hoaxs that were suppose to support evolution from the past?
So how does this fossil link fit in the evolutionary chain? A "missing link" should be placed in a sequence, otherwise it's a random piece. Did apes suddenly become smaller and grow tails and suddenly become larger and loose their tails to become humans? It may have human characteristics, but doesn't fit a sequence.
Where are the thousands and thousands of fossils of other morphological changes necessary to change from early prosimian to a human?
Charles Darwin wrote, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." We don't have "numerous, successive, slight modifications".
To my scientific mind Darwin's Theory is still a theory. Until more evidence can be produced, the "fact of evolution" is unfounded and therefore premature. This may well be a very unpopular stand but that doesn't change the reality that evolution is far from being proved.
I still remember the "Java Man" (I'm Javanese anyway), there weren't any fossils that supported Darwin's theory on his time (eventhough there isn't any today either). All the scientists found were a human (or maybe an animal skullcap), a couple of teeth and bones
The "Nebraska man"? All the scientists found was an extinct pig's tooth for goodness sake. The Piltdown man? They found a human skull, chimpanzee's tooth and an orangutan's jaw. They put it together and said, " WE HAVE THE MISSING LINK!" How serious can you get? This fossil, supposedly the 'missing link,' is probably nothing more than an extinct type of monkey.
Founding the fossil was very fascinated but concluding the discovery as the missing link or Darwin Validated is indeed, very prematured. This discovery helps to support evolution, not validate it.