A couple of days ago CNN broke the story of “Ida”, an early primate fossil which shows a possible link between lemurs and anthropoids (monkeys, apes, and higher apes including humans). While the fossil is astonishingly well preserved, especially for an Eocene primate, how does it “change everything”? This field is something of an avocation of mine, and it was my understanding that some primitive lemuroid/anthropoid creature, that gave rise to most or all present day primates could be reasonably supposed to have existed. Now we have the actual fossil, and it’s a one-of-a-kind find in terms of its preservation, but beyond that, so what?
Or is the “linking humans and lemurs” motif just a try at convincing the creationists, who might be more inclined to change their minds if, instead of being biologically related to such unpleasant creatures as chimps, we can tell them the connection is with cute, furry, saucer-eyed lemurs?
Or did lemurs fall out of the Primates order at some point? I thought they were related to us to begin with.
It doesn’t change everything. It doesn’t change anything, actually, except to confirm what we already knew, which is that lemurs and monkeys share a common ancestor. We just didn’t have a physical example from the fossil record, and now we do.
Won’t convince any creationists, of course, but that doesn’t matter. Fossils are awesome.
What a shame! That page uses the traditional image of progressively erect primates to display the loading progress… and they missed the opportunity to have it start with Ida.
Based on the paper itself, it doesn’t even represent a link between lemurs and monkeys. The authors place it closer to Haplorhini than to Strepsirhini. However, that assessment is based on plesiomorphic (i.e., ancestral) characters, rather than synapomorphic (derived) characters. So it’s not even clear at this point where exactly this critter belongs in the primate tree. So, not even a minor tremor, much less earthshaking.
The news and especially that promotional website seem to be chock-full of “this rewrites our history” claims.
Since our history, as Spectre of Pithecanthropus points out, is already written to include lemurs, presumably the extent of the “rewrite” is to type “Ida” into the margins of the textbooks? And then the promotional site mentions “transitional species.”
The term “transitional species” is a misnomer, at best a byproduct of sloppy thinking about the processes of natural selection and evolution. Use of the term is a red flag that one is dealing with a creationist, huckster, media personality, or time-traveler from the 1800s.
Sadly, until evolution can be taught without interference* (and thus get the treatment it deserves), we’re going to be stuck with phrases like “missing link” and “evolutionary ladder” for some time to come.
Or at least until science reporters actually decide to pick up a book and learn about what it is they’re reporting on, but fat chance of that happening…
Lowly science reporter: Damn, I keep writing all these articles and they go on the back page where no one reads them except guys who read blogs instead of news papers.
Editor: Well, what are you working on now?
LSR: Someone found a fossil that fits into the evolutionary chain from lemurs to monkeys.
Editor: Hmmm, so it’s a kind of missing link, then?
LSR: No, not really, that’s an outdated-
Editor: Yes, we could sell an article on a missing link. This could change everything!
LSR: No, it just kind of clarifies some-
Editor: You’ve got 4 column inches on the first page and 16 in the back. The Headline is “Missing link change everything!”
LSR: Really? The first page? I can write that!
Editor: Great! It’ll go right next to the story on Britney Spears’ designer flip-flops and make us look serious and dignified.
