Missing Link Fossil Discovered 864
choongiri writes "The Guardian is reporting the discovery of a missing link of evolution. From the article: "Scientists have made one of the most important fossil finds in history: a missing link between fish and land animals, showing how creatures first walked out of the water and on to dry land more than 375m years ago.""
Remain strong! (Score:5, Funny)
IANAEB (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I found him too! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:God vs Darwin (Score:2, Funny)
Missing link (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Great Transmogrification (Score:1, Funny)
Doesn't prove evolution (Score:3, Funny)
FYI (Score:5, Funny)
M = mega = 10^6
325m years = ~ 118.6 days
Missing link may be a bit young don't you think?
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:2, Funny)
Re: FYI (Score:5, Funny)
Wish granted! (Score:4, Funny)
You're a fookin returd.
Oh, and your post was really stupid too.
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:5, Funny)
"Then do you also believe that Homosapien is the final product of Creation? Are we the zenith of Evolution?"
Well, I don't know about this we business, but I know I am... :-D
Sorry, not a missing link (Score:5, Funny)
In much the same way as a hot water heater is unneeded since hot water is already hot.
Re: It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:3, Funny)
> > You know, the grandparent post was a little difficult to understand for me, thank you for translating it into numbers.
> Could someone please translate it into something simpler than numbers? Math hurts my brain.
Ok, try "no, there's a gap between l and l.S".
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:4, Funny)
Whoa! Speaking of predictive power! Man, you really nailed it!
Re:An elaboration. (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously (Score:5, Funny)
That qualifies as the missing link then, doesn't it.
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:4, Funny)
Um, no, God spent 6 days making them, and that was only 6000 years ago, the universe didn't even exist 2 billion years ago, DUH!!!
hehehe, how stupid do you feel now?!
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:2, Funny)
Wanna see what life forms look like when they live half in and half out of the water? Go watch surfers...
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:4, Funny)
In other words, I think the only thing stoping us from vacationing on the moon is the fact that too many people think that if governments had a safe place to escape the effects of nukes, they would be used more then they have been. We have the ability, just the desire of those with the ability has seemed to weaken a little.
Maybe i'm wrong and it is just a fuunding issue?
Re: Queue the "Creationists are idiots!" posts (Score:2, Funny)
Then the creator camuflaged this work to perfection:
1. Dinosuar bones
2. Carbon dating
3. Erosion and tektonic activites
4. DNA evolution
The allmighty obviously have _on-purpose_ misled us to find perfect support for evolution.
This must be for a reason.
Should we, his humble followers, try to reveal this perfect camuflage by shouting Creation?
I say _no_. The Creator have obviously done a perfect job hiding the evidence of creation, and planted false evidence for evolution to perfection.
He must obviously want us to conclude the evolution is the truth.
And even if we know better, who are we to try to find flaws in His effort to hide the nature of His creation.
It will at any rate be fruitless, for who think they can do better than the Allmighty, and find the evidence He has hidden to the ability of the Omnipotent?
As a creationist one therefore faithfully should document and support the beauty of the evolution, while quietly in your soul know the true nature of the universe.
So to the creationists I tell you: Abandon your blasphemic and arrogant ways. Preach Evolution!
but there is an image of it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:5, Funny)
2. Why did the sea creatures decide to go on land?
To get to the sea on the other side.
They just found it? (Score:3, Funny)
Before they found it. I don't recall any scientists saying "This theory of evoution might be convincing if we could find a fish with toes, but until then...."
Nor do I recall anyone saying "Well we had this link, but Mortimer apparently slipped it into his pants and took it out of the Smithsonian, and since then it has been missing..."
What else are they missing and not telling us about?
Whole thing just deepens my suspicion. I want an accounting of all the links they claim to have, but for all we know have also gone missing.
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:4, Funny)
Easy! Man.
Heh
I thought this was a missing link (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Wish granted! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's not a missing link, and nice predictions (Score:3, Funny)
Since you are on Slashdot most likely you are just an evolutionary dead-end.
Re:Let's address your own ignorance, shall we? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Let's address your own ignorance, shall we? (Score:3, Funny)
Doesn't seem to me like this guy supports Intelligent Design, he's just giving his spin on Gould's Non-Overlapping Magisteria of Science and Religion.