Comments on: New “Missing Link” Discovered

By: sschaper

sschaper — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:58:39 +0000

As Johansson has shown, it is amazing what you can do with an ape skeleton, a dremel, and an artist.

By: Paul78

Paul78 — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:58:39 +0000

I don’t why there is a hang up over a “missing link” by the media? When you see the Hominin tree there really is no need for a missing link.

By: Aaronious01

Aaronious01 — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:34:43 +0000

While I like the “missing link” missing in the artist’s rendition, I’ve always hated those depictions of evolution. They strongly imply a linear process, directed process, as if evolution is one of ‘lower’ organisms to ‘divine’ organisms.

That, and after seeing 1,000s of Frank & Ernest cartoons using it, they’re ruined forever. hahaha

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 01:01:02 +0000

We really won't know what the press releases mean, as far as the speculations about a "missing link" between Australopithecus afarensis and Homo habilis, until the formal announcement is made, later in the week. I hear (through personal correspondence) that three skeletons may be involved in the new discovery.

By: Paul78

Paul78 — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 00:16:59 +0000

The confusions by the news report was remarkable what i was concerned about when it came to confusing the original X-woman story.

Also to clarify, do you mean this would be a new species between A, Afarnsis and H. Habilis? As between the two there is already A. Garhi; so i wonder how this fits in with the Homini?

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 23:24:18 +0000

Not sure that the Telegraph had the first news of the X-Woman's pinky findings. The news came about due to the Nature site release.

By: maeko

maeko — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 22:56:51 +0000

why is the Telegraph breaking these stories before the science journals? they had the Denisova story first, as well. do the Brits have super-secret-hominid-sleuths or something?!