I guess someone had to post the obligatory missing link story. So, in case you did not hear, scientists have unveiled what they claim to be the fossil remains of a 47 million old skeleton that may explain the key link between early formed primates and modern Homo Sapiens. You can read more about the story here. The remains has both non-human and human-like features which may provide key evidence that human beings evolved from earlier form of primate like being. From the article:
It has, among other things, opposable thumbs, similar to humans’ and unlike those found on other modern mammals. It has fingernails instead of claws. And by examining the structure of its hind legs (one of which is partly missing), scientists say they can see evidence of evolutionary changes that would eventually lead to primates standing upright.
Okay, sounds convincing, but it sounds like there is some clear publicity going on as well. One of the scientists states: “‘Ida’s a direct human ancestor. But he said he was comfortable with the publicity surrounding it.”That’s part of getting science out to the public, to get attention,” he said. “I don’t think that’s so wrong.” The only question I have is, if this find is so amazing, why did it take them 20 years to bring it to the public’s attention. The fossil was found in 1983. It sounds more to me like scientists looking for more grant money and publicity, but I could be wrong.
The whole evolution debate is very similar to the global warming one. Many want to claim that the “science is settled” and are so dogmatic that they don’t even wish to engage in discussion or actual science that might contradict their world view. Evolution is somewhat similar, however both sides are very dogmatic. If you want a good read about the dogmatism of Evolution I would recommend GK Chesteron’s article here. Its a long read, but its funny and worth it. Among other points he makes he argues that the difference in man and beast is really a difference in type more then anything. If man did come from beast then the implication is that at some point a “person” was born which was no longer a beast and was fully human, even if this transistion took millions of years to reach the magic point, which certainly could happen. The other point he makes (which I appreciate) is that scientists are so interested in proving Darwin was right that they end up being at least as dogmatic as the craziest religious sect whom they scoff at. It is easy to reconcile Christianity with science . . . both are a matter of faith.
So, did evolution occur? Personally I buy at least some form of evolution. I don’t know if we evolved from ape or not, but I do believe that if so, there is some intelligence that guided that evolution. I find nothing contradictory between Christanity/Judaism and evolution myself. I will say that it is at least as likely that our DNA was planted here by aliens as evolution occured, at least there is about equal amounts of evidence to suggest either possibility. In fact, Robert Dawkins (the famous atheist) find more evidence that that we are in fact descended by aliens then created by God, so that tells you a little about the evolutionists mindset right there.
Technorati Tags: evolution