Oldest primate fossil yet found. It is a tiny Chinese Archicebus fossil

[Awesome]

Aaaah the age old and much simpler question. Was chicken first or the egg?


Coming back to the tail and the motor question.

The problem with question is that it assumes the whole bacteria existed as it is now from day one.

So the motor must have been fully functional operational from day one and the tail must have been fully functional from day 1.

This is not the natural selection the way I understand.


natural selection is that the motor or the tail or both started out as much much simpler "muscles" in the Flagellum Release 1.0.

then there were several branches out of 1.0 that experimented with smaller "muscles" of all kinds. where tail was very different than what is today and the motor was much much simpler than what is today.


Over a long time, these simpler mechanisms of tail and motor evolved in unison to the current form.

Now that are mature, we cannot take first one out and wonder how the heck the second will work without the first.

hope this helps.

The rotary motor is not a muscle. Bacteria doesn't contain muscle tissue! Your fictitious story has to meet certain technical scientific norms!

 

[Awesome]

Citing the dover trial victory of evolutionists is the same as saying how Darwin was rejected 150 years ago when he came up with his theory.

Intelligent Design poses questions that evolutionists have no answer other than scream ooh and aah about how fundamental science it is. A lot of fundamental sciences have been disproven over the past and ID finds more and more takers.

I get amazed when these people bring up same old debunked argument again and again in the hope that some how it will become true. See US Dover trial for this particular example. "Actual" scientist show how it evolved from a non-rotating flagellum which was used as a needle into a motor.. I think we are wasting time here!!!

Very nice, when Talon puts up her credentials as an actual scientist you belittle her by saying that "present your arguments", when I present my arguments you go back to "actual scientists" defence.

Please present your arguments on this thread and let's take it from there. If you can't justify your position, you're welcome to bow out and continue believing your "actual scientists". A suggestion people on this thread were only too ready to give @Talon.

Dover Trial is not the be all end all of the ID argument.

 

[Icewolf]

What will this fossil mean for the evolution theory

 

[Awesome]

In short, in this case, most of the proteins were there in other bacteria but acted as stationary "needle" used to inject whatever bacteria inject into a host. the new flagellum was evolved with simple addition of some more proteins that gave whole new use which were more suited for survival.

It's very easy to say "It evolved" but are you saying it evolved without natural selection?

If it had a tail and it did nothing, why wasn't the tail lost through natural selection?

 

[Developereo]

for sanity's sakes,


Let's keep God in our hearts where it belongs.


And


Let's keep science (scientific methods) in our heads where it belongs.



When you quit using your brain, and make decisions using emotions, you muck up your own present and your own future.

Look at the Tribal lands and learn something please.


Enough of this madness of mixing God in the discussion on scientific discovery.

Enough!

The discussion of God came up when @Juice asked why some religious people reject science.

The matter of religion, science and their interrelationship is a complex subject with a long history of philosophical thought and debate

 

[Developereo]

How would a creationist explain a multiverse? God chose a new project?

I don't know about creationists, but a scientist would say "show me proof of a multiverse before I waste time explaining it".

Popular science TV shows and sensationalist pseudo-science rags do not constitute proof.

 

[FaujHistorian]

What will this fossil mean for the evolution theory

This will obviously become a small part of a giant puzzle of how species changed/evolved over millions of years.

 

[Beerbal]

Its chinese, Please wait for its authenticity.. Please wait till world historians/anthrapolagist say it is real.. We all know Chinese are well known for faking things...

The techniques are both ingenious and varied as to what the Chinese do to fabricate and substantially enhance fossils. Most Chinese fossils are made by a combination of these processes. These techniques include:

1) Using real materials (bones, teeth, body parts) to embed in glue, resin and plaster to create a complete fake fossil composite on a slab or piece of matrix. (i.e. using modern chicken or frog bones glued to matrix to make various skeleton fossils).

2) Crushing genuine fossil bone and mixing with glue to fabricate body parts, skulls and skeletons that appear genuine with the proper color.

3) Casting, painting and sculpting a fossil on a slab or in three-dimension and even breaking it and then repairing it to appear genuine or give the appearance of calcite veins running through the fabrication.

4) Blending three-dimensional skulls (even using modern skulls!) of different animals together with artificially added real teeth to create fake skulls of rare, impressive animals. (especially a problem with Saber Cat skulls) This has been done by adding genuine fossil teeth to modern skulls or attaching animal teeth to a composite of modern skulls such as pig, dog, horse, cat, etc. to create new exotic or rare species.

5) Assembling genuine fossils of unrelated specimens together to make a complete, impressive fossil. The Chinese fossil fakers do this ALL THE TIME! Even the dinosaur eggs are faked by creating a dummy egg-shaped core and gluing on a mosaic of unrelated fossil eggshell pieces that once were part of hundreds of different fossil eggs (sometimes you can still see the varying colors of the unrelated pieces!) together like assembling a picture puzzle, to make what looks like a complete egg!


@God_Vs_evolution Theory: Just bcoz missing link not found, Religionists believe evolution theory is wrong. I will ask those God-mongers, Bro where is the proof that god exist???

Just like fear/rage/anger/love, God is creation of imagination..

 

[Developereo]

Erm...I do not know management terms...what is corporate memo? and what are you refering to as encoder gene? Ermmm some RNA are encode

A "corporate memo" is a communication (instructions) from one office to another. The encoder gene is one of the "real" genes whose function is known (2%) as opposed to the so-called junk DNA.

Anyway, there is no point belaboring the issue. My point was that a lot of evolutionary progression of physical characteristics involves tiny changes in existing structures rather than brand new structures: e.g. a longer tail, bigger teeth, more rods or cones, etc.

how can mutation would cause such a loop?

The mutation doesn't cause a loop. That's the whole point with a causality loop: A causes B which causes A, so cause and effect are not clearly defined. Such loops are possible, at least in theory.

Anyway, like I wrote, this is all highly speculative so no point dwelling on it.

 

[Developereo]

Its chinese, Please wait for its authenticity.. Please wait till world historians/anthrapolagist say it is real.. We all know Chinese are well known for faking things...

Fake "scientific" artifacts show up in all countries.
Look up the history of fake artifacts in England or Israel or Mexico, etc, etc.

 

[Beerbal]

Fake "scientific" artifacts show up in all countries.
Look up the history of fake artifacts in England or Israel or Mexico, etc, etc.

Thanks for defending China... ..

Yes faking is common in world, but China is well known for it.. (Its Universal truth, we don't need to argue about it)...

 

[Awesome]

The discussion of God came up when @Juice asked why some religious people reject science.

The matter of religion, science and their interrelationship is a complex subject with a long history of philosophical thought and debate

The world and its beliefs are even more complex now - you can not have a religion but believe in God. You can not believe in God and not believe in natural selection. You can believe in religion, believe in God and believe in evolution. Belief is free.

These issues arose when some scientists decided to mix philosophical debates like the purpose of our existence and describing our origins not to mention the over the top opposition from religious folks too.

 

[Developereo]

some scientists decided to mix philosophical debates like the purpose of our existence and describing our origins not to mention the over the top opposition from religious folks too.

There's hubris on both sides: religious folks assume that any rational explanation of the world is an attack on God's sovereignty, and scientific folks assume that such rational explanations constitute proof of God's nonexistence.

Neither viewpoint is accurate.

As Jesus said, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

It's really not that hard to be religious and scientific at the same time. Plenty of people manage to do just fine.

describing our origins

To be honest, I don't see why evolution is a challenge to God. Evolution only deals with the physical shape of our bodies, and if they happened to be shaped by natural forces on our planet, then so be it. Surely, humans didn't descend from outer space; we emerged out of the same processes that shaped the rest of life on Earth.

The part about "Man in God's image" refers to the soul and spiritual essence of man, not the physical form. Do people think that God is a giant humanoid and God made us as a "mini-me" version of Him?

Evolution, and science in general, has not even begun to tackle the question of the soul and spirituality in humans, so science really hasn't made any pronouncements on God -- regardless of what some people claim.

 

[Rustam]

Humans are primates.



Humans are apes,precisely African apes.Humans along with orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos are all descended from a common ancestor.And what kind of proof you want???

I see it works.

the missing link between europeans and indians. essentially the same. mates

Sorry, couldn't resits you see I spoke with somebody and this is the picture I posted and it came to mind when you said this. the indian monkey god "Hano Man".

 

[Juice]

I don't know about creationists, but a scientist would say "show me proof of a multiverse before I waste time explaining it".

Popular science TV shows and sensationalist pseudo-science rags do not constitute proof.

Most of these ideas such as a "multiverse" are artifacts of the mathematical model we use. The universe is provably strange enough (wave-particle experiments etc.)

I see it works.

the missing link between europeans and indians. essentially the same. mates

Sorry, couldn't resits you see I spoke with somebody and this is the picture I posted and it came to mind when you said this. the indian monkey god "Hano Man".

According to definitions...humans ARE primates....weather you agree to evolution or not....(also mammals, hominids, etc.)