SCI/TECH: Fossilised ape skeleton could be evolutions missing link

The famous missing link, the last common ancestor of humans and all great apes alive today is believed to be in found in fossilized form in a site near Barcelona, Spain. Although the term missing link is misleading according to Meike K�hler, a member of the research team, who says that this is not the species that gave rise to everything else which came later in the great ape tree, but only a species found in the early evolution of human and apes.



According to the article, even though the fossil was found in Spain, it must have lived in Africa, the temple for evolutionists, where earliest humans evolved too.

With the debate of Evolution vs. Creationism brought up recently in Wisconsin district, this is a significant find for the evolution believers, yet the creationists turn a blind eye toward these new finds, believing only in the Bible and lacking humility.

Funny that the findings in the west about humans been in this site of the world even before it was thought is strong enough to change history books, but I can wait how is going to play with the religious groups that wants to stay as close to the bible in the time line of this world as they can.

Many other discoveries has been found in spain before with apes like skeletons.

Interesting article!

These one is going to get heated fast because anything claimed to be the missing link is always hit hard by those who oppose evolution. I for one do oppose evolution but I am going to wait for more information before passing judgement. One thing is for sure with a statement like this

"I would call it a missing link ... This does not mean that just this individual, or even this species, exactly this species, must have been the species that gave rise to everything else which came later in the great ape tree. But it is, if not the species, most probably a very closely related species that gave rise to it," she said.

you are going to rustle the hen house.

Originally posted by BlackJackal
Interesting article!

These one is going to get heated fast because anything claimed to be the missing link is always hit hard by those who oppose evolution. I for one do oppose evolution but I am going to wait for more information before passing judgement. One thing is for sure with a statement like this

Thank you. I too found it interesting and capable of starting another heated debate which is why I posted it.

Sorry. Even though I don't fully agree with Evolution, I totally disagree with creationism. We are living in a century where interesting finds are day to day happenings, so it won't be long before we find enough evidence to either prove or disapprove evolution (that still doesn't prove creationsim), so sit tight.

Surf

The whole creationism nonesense obscures from people looking at the actual science related to evolution. The creationists just want people their stupid interpretation of the bible, and then they work hard to come up with "facts" to support it. Then, instead of doing real science, the anti-religious zealots have to go on screaming about how big idiots the creationists are.

The thing about these types of discoveries is that it may not be all that likely that we will ever find a direct descendent of humans. There may be cousins of early humans, and closely related species, but that doesn't necessarily make them the parents of humans. For instance, if all monkeys went extinct, and then in 5000 years some scientists unearths a bunch of monkey fossils, they might look like they are related to humans. However, that doesn't mean they are the actual ancestors of humans.

The power of a scientific theory is not some philosophical nonsense of saying we descended from this or that. The power is if the theory can help make predictions which conform to observed conditions. Evolution does explain why certain animals have certain characteristics in certain habitats. However, I don't believe it really helps us understand humans all that well. The problem with humans, is that we are almost entirely dependent on acquired ideas, and our tools, so it makes much more sense to look at memes than darwinian evolution.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the Bible is full of scientific facts that predate what the more modern scientist have just recently figured out.
As far as the THEORY of evolution, the experiment that "proved" evolutionists came from slime (creationalists and creation scientists came from fully advanced higher entities) has been proven to be bogus. The scientist that performed the experiment won't even defend it anymore. Sorry about that......

Originally posted by Hawker
I hate to burst your bubble, but the Bible is full of scientific facts that predate what the more modern scientist have just recently figured out.
The scientist that performed the experiment won't even defend it anymore. Sorry about that......

haha, you are too funny. "scientific facts" LMAO.

Surf

Originally posted by Hawker
As far as the THEORY of evolution, the experiment that "proved" evolutionists came from slime (creationalists and creation scientists came from fully advanced higher entities) has been proven to be bogus. The scientist that performed the experiment won't even defend it anymore. Sorry about that......

Do you have any info on this "experiment"? We live on a giant ball of evidence that supports the theory of evolution, and I've yet to see any real evidence supporting the creation theory. The Old Testament is a mix of history (some of which has been backed archeologically) and of myths. The shifts between history and parable usually seem obvious.

Originally posted by surfup
haha, you are too funny. "scientific facts" LMAO.

Surf

Laugh it up, it only shows your IQ. I can tell you are the type that won't read something and then bash it. Pressing the ignore button now.

Now Varitas93, you are a doubter, but you are respectful and I appreciate that. There is a great documentary called "A Question of Origins". It is a excellent piece covering the evolution/creation topic, I highly recommend it. It has scientists that have re-evaluated their stance due to evidence and facts. I have let a friend take it to transfer it from VHS to DVD, trouble is he is dragging his feet. When I get it back, I will look you up and give you all the names and details, even send you a DVD copy if you want it. Fair enough?

By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. Hebrew 11:3 (matter and atoms)

He stretches out the north over empty space, He hangs the Earth on nothing. Job 26:7 ( a Earth that "floats" unsupported in space)

Two science facts from thousands of years ago. It has only been about 500 years ago when the scientists thought the earth was flat and we were the center of the universe!



[edit on 19-11-2004 by Hawker]

Originally posted by Hawker
When I get it back, I will look you up and give you all the names and details, even send you a DVD copy if you want it. Fair enough?

The names and details would be more than enough, but thanks for offering the actual DVD. I'm afraid that no matter what one group of scientists may have decided, the truth is that we never really understand a situation fully from a scientific perspective. The "facts" change every day with each new dicovery.

By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. Hebrew 11:3 (matter and atoms)

He stretches out the north over empty space, He hangs the Earth on nothing. Job 26:7 ( a Earth that "floats" unsupported in space)

Two science facts from thousands of years ago. It has only been about 500 years ago when the scientists thought the earth was flat and we were the center of the universe!

There is only one problem with this logic. Many non-Christian cultures made similar observations. Democritus, who was neither a Jew nor a Christian but rather a Greek philosopher, was the first to suggest that the universe was composed of invisible and indestructible particles. "Atomos" literally translates as "indestructible particles". You can read any religious and/or philosophical text from ancient times and find wisdoms such as these. That only proves that our ancient ancestors were a bit smarter than we have thought.

I'll certainly look into whatever research you may provide, but I find it highly unlikely that such information will sway my stance on the theories of evolution and creation. I am one of those who thinks that the two theories may actually be linked. I just don't see why science and faith should oppose eachother.

I am one of those who thinks that the two theories may actually be linked. I just don't see why science and faith should oppose eachother.

I agree. Here's an article supporting that stance:
mantis2501.tripod.com...

-raven

I made a thread about this and nobody cared. Shoulda made it a headline