I doubt this will make much difference to the fundamentalist beliefs, but at least its an important link in the chain for those of us that give a damn. 
That’s pretty cool…transitional forms are really rare. I guess I didn’t know that there was needed a ‘missing link’ to confirm Darwin’s theory. I’m not exactly sanguine that this new evidence is going to have much impact on the already skeptical…after all, there is literally a mountain of evidence out there.
Still, thanks for the (missing) link!
-XT
Drudge has two links. One from Sky is sensationalist and uses the term “missing link”. The one from the WSJ is much better and says that there really is no such thing as a missing link. The fossil really just makes it more clear on what lineage primates branched off from.
But doesn’t this mean there are now TWO missing links - one on either side of this newly discovered fossil - where there was previously but one? Seems to me this whole “theory” is becoming even more tenuous.
There isn’t a missing link…that’s the point. This is simply one of the really rare transitional forms. It’s interesting, no doubt…but it doesn’t ‘prove’ the theory. It merely continues to re-enforce an already toweringly strong theory with additional conclusive evidence.
-XT
God put that “fossil” there 6,000 years ago.
Duh.
This fossil is 47 million years old. Human lineage is believed to have split from other primates 6 million years ago.
:dubious: I thought the current theory was that all the ‘fossils’ were laid down during the great flood (I concede this was seemingly around 6000 years ago). I think your theory is seriously flawed, and hopelessly behind the times, Whack-a-Mole…
-XT
Geez…thought I had been around here long enough to not have to put a <sarcasm alert> tag on a post like that. 
Think of ‘human lineage’ as a tree. We are currently on a branch at the top of the tree (the tree of course is still growing so there may be new branches in the future). We split off from other primates (Chimps IIRC) something like 6 million years ago…i.e. our branch went one way and their branch went another. A bit back from that along the tree was a common ancestor. Now…follow the tree even further back to another of those branchings along the path that leads to humans (and a bunch of other primate species)…well, that’s where this new fossil resides.
Easy, ehe?
-XT
“Missing Link” as an idea is bad enough, but Darwin’s theory confirmed? Way too far.
So?
Believed by who?
And I thought I didn’t need to put a <tongue in cheek> alert either. 
-XT
The fossil isn’t a common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees, it is one of the common ancestors of lemurs and monkeys. Since primates split from early mammals, and monkeys split from early primates, and apes split from early monkeys, and hominoids split from early apes, and hominids split from early hominoids, and humans split from early hominids, then this fossil could easily have been an ancestor of humans.
Or perhaps not–it could very easily have been closely related to the species that gave rise to the extant primates, but it could have no living ancestors today.
Using the Genesis chronology & dating Abraham around 2000 B.C., the Deluge was more like 4300-4400 years ago. Adam’s creation, or perhaps fall, was about 6000 years ago.
Whooshes aside, I’m not devoted to the Bible chronologies being complete.
And I still have never heard any creationist claim the fossils were just placed there by God.
Sure, what do you know about the subject of Lemur ancestors?..
Oh wait. Nevermind.
My favorite ‘transitional form’ fossil is Tiktaalik. It’s the Darwin fish!
What do you mean, now confirmed?
Huh…and I was always rather fond of Darwin’s Finch…
-XT
Not to hijack the thread but if a Creationist insists the earth was created 6,000 years ago then how else can they explain dinosaur bones other than “God put them there”?
We have cave paintings that old showing some animals from that time. I feel safe in saying if there were 20 foot tall toothy lizards running about (not to mention all the other big lizards) they’d have certainly gotten a mention by some human somewhere and somewhen.