Where's the missing link?

Question

To be more specific...The idea of a SINGULAR creation deity is illogical to me. I do see similarities between mammal and primate behavior and anatomy. And a few similarities between mammal and reptiles/birds. Not very many though. Even with millions of years to consider, primates seem to be relatively 'new' on the scene and don't seem to have that much in common with reptiles or birds. (Also, I thought I saw in an Archeology magazine, of the 'current' homo sapien skeleton's found, none are older than 6,000 years. Any info on this?)

Answer 1

various non-missing links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

Homo sapiens has been around for a lot longer than 6000 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution#Homo_sapiens


Edit:
What really makes me laugh is that the creationists claim that what they want to see is a skull with half human form and half ape. They state that the fossil skulls are all ape or all human.

However, their 'experts' can't agree on anything but the earliest primate and the latest human. For all the intermediate skulls some say that they are ape (because of the ape like characteristics) and others say that are human (because of the human like characteristics).

Unwittingly they have shown that these intermediate skulls are EXACTLY what they claim does not exist.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html

This blows 'pops' argument below totally out of the water. These are the CREATIONIST experts who can not agree. The scientist have no problem putting them in order.

Answer 2

Face it, we are making new fossil discoveries all the time. A couple years ago scientist in Eurasia uncovered the bones of an ape like creature with a similar skull as modern homosapiens, they named the animal the Pierolapithicuis and they believe this is our ancestor and it is over 14,000,000 million years old. For the people that says we come from Ethipia or whatever they incorrect for that is only partially true. We might have left Africa after the ICE Age over 500,000 years ago but we(our species) is much older then that and had originally moved into Africa from Eurasia because of the Ice Age. If global warming takes a turn for the worse, we could end up doing the same thing again where all humans will have to migrate to sub equadorial climates.

Answer 3

No, you're incorrect. a scientific theory ought to be testable and disprovable. Creationism is neither, so it is not a theory. Evolution is in keeping with shown data, even with the reality that if new data got here to easy conflicting with it, then Evolution might no longer be smart. when you consider that Darwin proposed his theory in 1859, advances in genetics, zoology and paleantology have reinforced evolutionary theory. over the final 148 years, hundreds of thousands of fossils have been stumbled on, which contain hundreds of hundreds of fossils of hominids and early human beings. Genetic discoveries have shown that human beings proportion almost ninety 9% of their genes with different primate species, construction the case for our origins. .

Answer 4

You are not correct in your dating of homo sapien fossils...

Published in the February 17, 2005 issue of the journal Nature are new findings pushing the dawn of humans back another 35,000 to 195,000. New dating technology was applied to fossils discovered in 1967 by a team led by Richard Leakey on the banks of Ethiopia's Omo River. The fossils named Omo I and Omo II, were previously dated at 130,000 years old.

Answer 5

Personally, I think everyone is getting desparate, here. Both Creationists and Evolutionists have run out of any real evidence.
I suspect that any evidence produced by either side will only inflame the other side further, and produce more animosity.
The irony of it all is, nobody really knows for sure just how God brought mankind about. Could He have used evolution as a tool? I dunno, and neither does anyone else. Did He create each species separately? That's what I think He did do, but again, I don't know, and neither does anyone else.
My advice, for what it is worth, is to quit worrying yourself over stuff you can't prove anyhow, and just enjoy the life God has given you.

Answer 6

If you think that the human species is only 6000 years old then you think that the early part of the Roman empire did not exist. Plenty of skeletons of humans have been found, and many transitional variants of humans from the Neanderthals to Homo Habilis.

Answer 7

Ape like creatures date back millions of years BUT modern man only dates back around 6 thousand years.

Also, these "specialist", no matter how hard they try and wish, CANNOT find the link between the "ape people" and modern man. They have found some deformed skeleton and try to make it the link but they are grabbing at straws.

The ape like creatures did evolve over the years they walked on earth but not into modern man.

Who did Cain marry when he killed Able and went to the land of Nod??????? Pops

Answer 8

Well to answer the last question first, modern humans are at least 100,000 years old.

As to the rest, fossils are so very last century, DNA analysis gives us all we really need to know about lineages, try Dawkins' 'The Ancestor Tale' for a complete descrption.

Answer 9

Using a punctuated equilibrium model, a "missing link" would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to find.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

Answer 10

More accurately "links" and there are none because fossils are not progressive they only show a specific individual without knowledge of their ancestors or descendants.