Fossil Ida: extraordinary find is 'missing link' in human evolution

Southern Man said:
Douchebag, he claimed that biologists weren't concerned about the origin of life, so I posted a link about biologists working to find the origin of life. :readit:
Click to expand...
Not exactly. I said "the ultimate origins of life on this planet is something that biologist have nothing to say on." That's a subtle yet significant difference. We certainly wish to have an understanding on the natural origins of life but on the issue of an ultimately supernatural origin of life we have nothing to say on this as it is outside the scope of science. It may or may not be true but there is no way for science to either confirm or deny that.
 
Let's clarify, the word "supernatural" means, something outside of our understanding of the natural world. Anti-matter and black holes would have been considered "supernatural" just a few years ago. It is only because these anomalies have been observed, they are considered natural, because they clearly defy any scientific explanation. 500 years ago, lightning may have been considered "supernatural" because we had no "natural" explanation for it.

Currently, the concept of a God or Intelligent Designer, is indeed "supernatural," but that simply means it defies the laws of nature and physics within our known universe, not that it isn't real or possible. This is important to remember in a scientific perspective. Science is supposed to continue asking questions, not make conclusions. Motthead, and others like him, will easily make conclusions regarding "supernatural" things, or stuff that science can't explain. The human arrogance has always been, to assume what we know, is all there is to know.
 
i think that is eda and do not forget lucy

hopefully more 'missing' links will be found

so much for the creationists, but they will not be deterred

oh well
 
Dixie said:
Let's clarify, the word "supernatural" means, something outside of our understanding of the natural world. Anti-matter and black holes would have been considered "supernatural" just a few years ago. It is only because these anomalies have been observed, they are considered natural, because they clearly defy any scientific explanation. 500 years ago, lightning may have been considered "supernatural" because we had no "natural" explanation for it.

Currently, the concept of a God or Intelligent Designer, is indeed "supernatural," but that simply means it defies the laws of nature and physics within our known universe, not that it isn't real or possible. This is important to remember in a scientific perspective. Science is supposed to continue asking questions, not make conclusions. Motthead, and others like him, will easily make conclusions regarding "supernatural" things, or stuff that science can't explain. The human arrogance has always been, to assume what we know, is all there is to know.
Click to expand...
There you go again Dixie putting your ignorance of science out there for all to see again. I'll let others deal with it, I'm not wasting my time any more.
 
Mottleydude said:
Not exactly. I said "the ultimate origins of life on this planet is something that biologist have nothing to say on." That's a subtle yet significant difference. We certainly wish to have an understanding on the natural origins of life but on the issue of an ultimately supernatural origin of life we have nothing to say on this as it is outside the scope of science. It may or may not be true but there is no way for science to either confirm or deny that.
Click to expand...
From my earlier link:
This illustration represents the host of natural phenomena which collectively have created life as we know it. Life apparently requires a solar system having a planet with "suitable" conditions such as liquid water, nutrients, and sources of energy. Interactions between various substances and energy yielded the autocatalytic systems capable of passing information from one generation to the next, and the thread of life began...
Click to expand...
 
Mottleydude said:
I can't answer the first question and I'm not sure I understand your second question as for a spectacular find, it is one. Most fossils of complex vertibrates are very incomplete the level of quality of this speciman is remarkable indeed. Right down to seeing the outline of it's musculature, it's fur coat and even to contents of it's belly. Just simply amazing fossil preservation. From that point of view, this is a very remarkable fossil specimen.

As for it's scientific implications, I can't possibly advance any opinions as not enough information has been provided on this organisms anatomy, homology and phylogeny to discuss any evolutionary implications it may represent.
Click to expand...

I completely agree the state of the fossil is indeed spectacular, but it's scientific implications, at least those being advertised, don't match the science that is now known. It seems not only a leap in faith, but a leap in science.

Had this been announced as merely a great fossil find that opens the door to further scientific examination, I'd be sharing in the wonder of the find. But something seems amiss here.

Hyperbole always leads to distrust.
 
ib1yysguy said:
More insults means I twin twice! My wins are going to start carrying over into our next argument.

Keep digging!
Click to expand...
Actually, since you stooped so low to insult my family on multiple occasions, until I "go there", you get nothing. Except of course a handful of your own jizz. :mun:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top