Darwinius masillae, or “Ida,” is the 95% preserved fossil of the Lemur-monkey-ape-man with opposable thumbs, a tail, no grooming claw, fossilized fur, is approximately the size of a raccoon and apparently has the remnants of its ancient veggie burger in its stomach. According to researchers this is not a lemur because it has no grooming claw or “toothcomb” and is similar to a human because it has a talus bone similar in structure/shape, nails (as do primates), and opposable thumbs (like lemurs and primates).
Is it the “Missing Link”?
I have no idea (though according to the Biblical account of Creation it seems rather unlikely); however, based on the information in the reports, the images of Ida and my (limited) understanding of animals I highly doubt it. Other than having 5 “fingers,” one similar bone, nails, and opposable thumbs I find it almost laughable to see the images and consider it my long lost great, great, great… grandmother. It seems to be a wishful thinking conclusion based on similarities (coincidence?) more than actual possibility. It seems like “walks like a duck, quacks like a duck” sort of historical science: “of the millions of genetic features contained within a human, this species has a possible “x” amount that are similar! Congrats, gents, we have our duck, er, human-ape-lemur connection!” (I have no idea how many there are, but even if it were 1,000 out of 1,000,000 that’s still only .1% similar.)
For more on this from a Creationism standpoint, checkout the following article: “Ida: the Missing Link at Last?”
PARENTS: At no point should we as believers be intimidated by these "findings." A few points to remember about science and God: (1) God created everything, (2) God created man with the ability to know Him, (3) God created man with the ability to think and rationalize, (4) Science is not the enemy of God (matter of fact, much of it helps us to understand His Creation better), (5) Truth will always be true - it cannot be refuted. Christianity ought to always welcome a healthy conversation with the skeptic. Instead of fearing new "findings" (such as "missing link" findings, "tomb of Jesus" findings, etc.) we ought to use them to dialogue with the skeptics and to articulate the position of a creative Creator whose design was flawless and founded in hope.
Want to join the conversation? Click here to comment or ask a question!
Image credit: Associated Press
_________________
1 comments:
I think the best thing to take from this latest report is how well it will be received and accepted in the people circles of the world and how much of an inclination will it make towards accepting evolution over creation for believers and non-beleivers. This evidence, no matter how true it is, does not prove anything one way or another.
Darwin, in his time, simple expressed the facts of possible evolution from mutated traits of one species to an new improved form of the old being. One that could adapted, survive and reproduce itself. The being with the old, outdated traits would fall off as it couldn't survive as well as the new being. The missing link that evolutionists look for is the advanced mutated ape that has the traits of survival that a man has.
Evolution is still a theory because this "thing" does not qualify enough to make it a truth. Creation is still a belief that is a part of many different religions around the world. Becuase of this the only thing that matters is, what do people hold as truth? For a beleiver, did God create the world through Christ like it says in John 1:3&4? Did God create man in His image like is says in Genesis 1:26-28? Or, was there just a random happenstance that spontaneously started the world, by chance produced life and evolved it to the point of Man?
If I were a devout evolutionist, that would never accept the views of creation, then I would make it my mission to turn over every stone and uncover every rock that existed to find the missing link. Finding mutated beings is easy in comparison.
Another thing to note about links of anything, the missing link is never the last link. I beg to say that the chain in the evolutional theory of man has more than one link missing. If this "thing" is the missing link, how did it finish the chain towards man?
Post a Comment