The missing link: Worth the hype?

Posted: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 2:03 PM by Daily Nightly Editor

by Robert Bazell, chief science correspondent

With great fanfare, New York's Mayor Bloomberg and others today unveiled a model of a 47-million-year-old fossil of a baby monkey-like creature at the American Museum of Natural History. The unveiling was part of a promotion effort by the History Channel and Little, Brown Book Group, which are producing a documentary and a book about the discovery.

There is no question that this is an important scientific finding. The fossil purchased by scientists at a market in Europe is exceptionally well preserved. But the documentary is titled "The Link: This Changes Everything," and the press kit for the event declares that reporters are about to "witness the most important find in 47 million years."

So I phoned Dr. Tim White at the University of California, Berkeley. White is a renowned paleontologist who played a key role in the discovery of "Lucy," the first ape-like creature to stand erect and many other important findings about the evolution leading to humans.

"Three words," he said. "Over the top."

The people who promoted this event make a big deal out of the possible place this newly discovered fossil plays in the evolution leading to humans. But if you read their actual scientific paper in a respectable peer-reviewed scientific journal (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0005723) the scientists make no such claim.

The big question about this finding, White said, "is whether it is the 'Mother of All Monkeys?' and that is not even resolved. With years of study the scientists will learn whether this is the creature that stands at the intersection of one group of primates that went on to be best represented by lemurs today or another group that went on to be chimps and humans. But they don't know yet."

The event organizers do seem to know, however, the potential value of hype.

Click here to watch Robert Bazell's Nightly News report, "Fossil Frenzy."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

New York hyping a lie? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.

Dave, Tn (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 2:21 PM)

Hi Robert,

I'm glad that you wrote this segment. I watch alot of
the History Channel doumentaries. But they should be careful and do more research before they present in the way they're doing. I would have believed it. How could they even promote it as the "Mother of all monkies" and get away with it legally?
That may have happened with alot of other shows and we'll never know.
But keep us informed on matters like this. You're great at getting to the naked science of matters.

Vicki

P.S.

I've been reading more about the Hubble telescope and what will be it's replacement in 2012(?)
It may take some time for us to accept the Web telescope. But as someone wrote, it's not really replacing the Hubbble, but will be able to extend what Hubble was and is doing.
It's strange how people can become so fond of what we see as an "object."

Anyway, look forward to your other segments. You do a terrific job.

Vicki

Vicki, Greenville, S.C. (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 3:37 PM)

This is a joke right? Like humans evolved from this creature. Oh my! If you believe this I have swampland in Florida with you name on it.

Kim, Irvine, CA (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 4:44 PM)

Why would the paper in the scientific journal repeat something a marketing team dreamed up to promote a new documentary and book??? There's a difference between science and marketing and entertainment. Somebody has to pay for the science to be done in the first place, so now they try and recover their costs through books and video's. But behind all that hype the science must continue... It's a huge discovery be it for humans OR lemurs! :)

Chris Stenger, Albuquerquen NM (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 4:55 PM)

pls give me a break, what they still have failed to produce is a true transitional fossil of any kind let alone a humanoid one. for all of sciences great strides this is one that still proves we are no smarter than dinosaurs.

David Walker, Knoxville, TN (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:11 PM)

I agree that at this time there is a propensity to hype this potential discovery. Let true science prevail and let honest discussion and examination of the data. I am saddended at some in the science community that are more concerned with fame that they allow for bad science to prevail. But, even worse to allow for a hoax to receive legitimacy. Again, let true science prevail and the magnitiude of this discovery will reveal itself.

James Campa, Las Vegas, Nevada (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:12 PM)

I Think that this is just like all the rest of the
missing links that have been found! rediculous
Get a life
Ed

Ed American Fork Utah (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:14 PM)

This is the second article I read about the "Missing Link" fossil. This article was better than the first, but both make assumptions. I am a scientist in the Biotech field. I personally find this to be a lot of hype and mostly one man trying to draw attention to create fame and fortune for himself. Missing Link? Yep, the link connecting the fossil to man is missing.

Senator man, Atlanta, GA (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:22 PM)

Genesis= "Let us create man in our image" So, we are not human?
This story holds no water.

John, So. Cal. (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:27 PM)

This is such a joke to academia. Science should be based upon repeatable data, otherwise it is only theory. Theory and true science are not the same. True scientific findings remain true and consistent throughout time (ie. physics laws), but theories can be disproved. This is one isolated fossil, that people are trying to build an entire theory around. Maybe we should look for science in the circus side show exhibits.

Mike, Israel (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:31 PM)

Just what we need! More fuel for the wing nuts.
A conspiracy for the religious right and origin proclamations by the scientists. The wing nuts can't deal with Ida being "left behind". While scientists proclaim her as the "mother" of all mothers. Oh man, I can't wait.

James B. Evans (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:53 PM)

A bit overblown, definately when compared to Lucy, but still interesting. Evolutions of humans at later levels is much better documented then farther back in history, so maybe discoveries like these will shed more light on the past.

Jane D (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:57 PM)

These people are fanatics always looking to deny creation. If this is what they believe thats fine but don't push it in public schools because there is no proof.

Mike Scarano, Orlando, Fl (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:19 PM)

It mentioned Lucy........... Lucy has been scientifically proven to be a fraud, so why mention it as if it holds any ground? And how reliable is an object that was bought in secret, for all we know, this could be the work of a really good team of fanatical darwinists. Personally, I think someone just wants fame and fortune from a lie, thats what happened with Lucy.

Kurt Simpson, New York, NY (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:30 PM)

Hype is right. Another chance for the believers in this evolution fairytale to rattle their cages and pretend that people of faith are backwards. I pity them on judgment day.

Ricky, Salem, WI (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:47 PM)

Just because there is some relative link to Monkeys and Apes, just means there is a possible link to them only, not Humans.

Terry, Oregon (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:49 PM)

This is a really good find that will change the text books for anthropologist. But will it be the end all for evolutionisim vs creationsisim? Not a chance! In fact, it does take many findings of the same creature to make it more fact than fiction. Even when Lucy was found, it took a while to find other fossils to classify her into her group. So, it will be big if we find more of the same. But a long way to go to complete the evolutionary cycle of homo sapians

Greg (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:52 PM)

This is a really good find that will change the text books for anthropologist. But will it be the end all for evolutionism vs creationism? Not a chance! In fact, it does take many findings of the same creature to make it more fact than fiction. Even when Lucy was found, it took a while to find other fossils to classify her into her group. So, it will be big if we find more of the same. But a long way to go to complete the evolutionary cycle of homo sapians

Greg (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:52 PM)

Although there are still many more questions to be answered, what we do know is that Evolution is a Fact. However, many Homo sapiens do not beleive that we evolved. Fossils like Ida are important because they bring about conversation, and get people thinking.

-An American Archaeologist

Mike, Las Vegas, Nevada (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 7:18 PM)

-If we evolved from a single cell organisms, or we evolved from fish or birds or monkeys, Then will you please answer this question If we EVOLVED "FROM " them then why are there still fish and birds and monkeys, why arent we all humans? You cannot answer this, because there is a creator and we have over 600,000 pages of DNA in our cells, we have not evolved from them or they would not be here now because they would all be humans!! There is a God. There is no doubt in my mind I am a living testimony to to our Living God. End of debate!!

Cheryl R. Dean St Louis, Missouri (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 7:27 PM)

As a man who has personally taken an interest in this field of academia, I can certainly say that there is too huge a disconnect between this fossil(s) and the Lucy specimen which is believed to be 4 to 6 million years old. Although some minor pieces of primates exist back further than Lucy, they are incomplete. This so-called 'missing link' has not bridged a 39 million year gap.

Tim (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 7:50 PM)

Complete hype. That was the admitted intention of this event. Most of us are saying Ho-Hum. Nothing really new here.

John, Raleigh NC (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 7:59 PM)

Calling it a "missing link" or a "transitional fossil" is wrong--scientists use no such terms. Calling it "THE missing link" is improper science and overweening hype.

It is an interesting fossil, and perhaps is ancestral to all us monkeys. But it isn't the first fossil that is ancestral to all us humans, and nothing else, if it is eight times older than the split between us humans and the chimps.

The hype is bad science, and gives ammunition to the folks who are confused about the process of evolution. Evolution is a scientific fact of life, but this kind of circus show makes it look like the wild guesses that too many folks believe it is.

Mitch, Marshfield, MO (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:00 PM)

To SA man: if you are a Biotech scientist, as you claim to be, surely you would know of the theory of punctuated equilibrium? Just because there is no fossil means that a "gap" is unexplainable. If youu are what you claim you to be, you should know that simply jumping at something is not the responsible thing to do. Plus, would you say the same of Einstein, or Oppenheimer, or Feynman? They were just rabblerousers looking for fame?

To John: Why biblical literalism? How does the story not hold water? Because it doesn't specifically say in the Bible?

If you look at that same statement as a metaphor, it means more along the lines of free will. That is what would differentiate us from the creature whose fossils have just been discovered. Therefore, your logical jump is altogether illogical and baseless.

To Mike: So, a theory has no way of proving itself? Does that mean that every theory, from Relativity to Evolution to Gravity itself, must therefore be discounted as science because they are merely theories? What of theorems?

To claim that "true science" and theory are not the same implies a lack of understanding about the relationship the two share. Fact is something observable. Theory is extrapolating on those facts, using those facts to try and establish a pattern. Sure, there are missteps (cold fusion and whatnot), but theories are self correcting and, if there is enough evidence to topple it in the manner of the Geo-centric universe, so be it. But the theory of evolution just not simply focus on this one fossil. This fossil was simply a large gaping hole in our genetic history that may just be filled now. It's far more important that just some "sasquatch" style missing link.

Chris S, Chino, California (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:15 PM)

Indeed this is very suspect...found in 1983 and just being brought to light now? Evolution is the fairy tale that adults have now come to believe.

Walter Coxe, Alberta, Canada (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:21 PM)

Are you kidin me???? how did this piece ever get media attention in the first place. Of course the link or whatever you wanta call it, has no similence to humans.

Calvin Roberson, Costa Mesa, Cali (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:34 PM)

The "missing link" is absolutely ridiculous. I find the suggestion that I came from a lizard to be totally
ludicrous. Just as ludicrous as saying I came from a fish or ape. I might start to believe some of this nonsense if someone would show me (right now - in the present) a human evolving into something else!

Charles Bujan, Port Aransas, Texas (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:37 PM)

God's image is in the spirit of human beings, not in the look of them. Poor little Ida never got to find out.

Pat Parker, Cleveland OH (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:46 PM)

I'm pretty sure that this is actually my rottweiler i buried about 20 years ago, a lot of the same features...

The more "science" attempts to make this kind of stuff credible, the less credible the "scientists" become.

Jerry Garcia, Corvallis Oregon (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:56 PM)

I'm a Master's student of Geology and Paleontology, working on the evolutionary trends and biostratigraphy of Cretaceous foraminifera. For me to here laypeople say there is no such thing as transitional fossils is absolutely RIDICULOUS. I have literally hundreds of specimens proving that.

No one is saying that this is the missing link between monkeys and humans! They are saying its a transitional form between PROSIMIANS (Lemur lineage) and SIMIANS (Monkey-Ape lineage), since it displayes morphological characteristics of both lineages. Since hominoids (Australopithenes) and eventially hominids (Homo erectus, sapiens, aka Humans) evolved from a great ape ancestor, that means that by extension, we share a common ancestor with Ida. No one is doubting that this find is a very primitive simian. The scientific controversy is whether this specimen represents a DIRECT ancestor to the Moneky-Ape lineage, or whether is is simply a very early offshoot, aka an evolutionary dead end.

Nick, Indiana (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:16 PM)

Wow… the fossil’s preservation is amazing! You could see far more then the skeletal structure. As for this being THE missing link I can not say.
It does amaze me however how many antiquated posters you still have. Humans are still evolving, some of us faster then others. Perhaps the Neanderthal DNA is more dominant in some then the Homo Saipan.
Every thing on this planet and in the universe is a result of some form of evolution and who’s to say that that is not what God set in motion so many billions of years ago.
The beauty and complexity of evolution is greater then any biblical mythology.

Annemarie Kucner, Scottsdale AZ (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:21 PM)

P.S.

Hi again, Mr. Bazell. I think that we're evoloving just by having a healthy debate.That's where real progress lies, in expanding our minds and accepting the fact there are shades of gray.
As I stated in my earlier post to you,the History Channel is jumping the gun. And how can anyone get away with this legally?
Has anyone ever heard of the God particle? My personaly belief is that there is evolution and that there is pure energy that created every living thing.

Why is there alway extreme viewpoints and no shades of gray?
Extremism aways comes back to bite us in the butt.

Vicki

Vicki, Greenville, S.C. (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:29 PM)

Wow… the fossil’s preservation is amazing! You could see far more then the skeletal structure. As for this being THE missing link I can not say.
Every thing on this planet and in the universe is a result of some form of evolution and who’s to say that that is not what God set in motion so many billions of years ago.
The beauty and complexity of evolution is greater then any biblical mythology.

Annemarie Kucner, Scottsdale AZ (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:30 PM)

I want to see evolution in action. Someone answer me this. If animals evolve to better adapt to hunt, or evade preditors or survive in a changing environment; How do they change into the proper creature when all of the other factors are changing as well? Evolution happens so slowly that it takes generations for it to happen. How does that work? If a male of a spieces suddenly gets an evolving gene and mates with a female that also has an evolving gene that differs from its own which one wins? Also, most animals mate with the strongest and most suited, why would it want to mate with somthing that is different that its self?

Brian (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:37 PM)

Charles Bujean, you did come from the ancestor of a fish. "show me (right now - in the present) a human evolving into something else!"

Through genetics, we know that all humans on the planet right now are related to a single tribe that originated in Africa about 100,000 years ago. Through DNA research (in particular y-DNA Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms), this is known with 100% certainty. Now, do people on each of the continents looks the same? For example, do Africans, Asians, and Caucasians look the same? Obviously, they do not. Caucasians are lighter colored, Asians are generally shorter, etc. It is no coincidence that these differences occur on different continents. Environment is what drives evolution. People in geographically isolated areas have evolved differently... and right here and right now, people have different physical characteristics.

BTW, you can test your own DNA anonymously through National Geographic web site and they can tell you your ancient lineage and migratory route from the horn of Africa, where Homo sapiens became a separate species (genetically incapable of breeding with other species).

Eric (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:45 PM)

Human Evolution is a scientific fact. For all you doubters just compare the embryo of a human being, an ape, a chicken, etc., they all look remarkably the SAME......... wonder why that is?????

Tim White is great, I had for anthropology 101 at Cal.

Nick (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:45 PM)

P.S.S.

My third comment. Hopefully one will get posted.

I think we have along way to go before we go from Lucy
to this fossil.

As far as evolution not existing:
When I was younger some people believed that we never really landed on the moon,that the "landing" took place at a studio lot. And then someone needed to come with a video that looked as if an alien was being disected by military drs.

Again, two good axamples of extremes. We did land on the moon. The Hubble has estimated that Earth is appx. 13.7 billion yrs.old, but I doubt that anyone has disected an alien.

The proof is there. We are just one link away from chimps.But no, it's rediculous for those scientists to make way for everyone who doesn't believe in evolution. They don't know how far they (scientists of latest fossil)are setting us back,having to explain everything over again.

Please look at the photos from the Hubble. You can really see the artwork of science, nature, God.

Vicki

Vicki, Greenville, S.C. (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:07 PM)

47 million years old?? Really? I just have one question? What dating procedures did these evolutionary scientist use to come up with that number? I didn't know we had the technology to date things that old. That's it!, Geologic colum, The faith filled colum that can't really seem to be found anywhere except the public school text books. Is it possible that this is just a extinct monkey that die, and fossilized?

I don't see how this fossil could be my great great Grandpa. Am I looking at it wrong? Help, a concerned biblical creationist.

Jim 29 Palms Cal (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:07 PM)

I'll wait for more research and more specimens before I believe this is the most important fossil find, like, EVER. Lucy is by far the most important link we have in the hominin fossil record. However, if 'Ida' proves to be related to even Notharctus it will still be a colossal find. As for the guy who finds it "ludicrous" that we have similar ancestors to apes, I have to tell you pal, the creation of the world in six days and six billion people coming from two nudists talking to a snake is a pretty wacky idea as well.

Keiko (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:35 PM)

you guys are truly amazing someone finds an amazing fossil and you crap all over it. your all just looking to shoot something out of the sky arn't you? the guy who wanted to see someone evolve well evolve out of being someone so synical geez

george washington,Seattle,Washington (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:37 PM)

Annemarie it was your last few lines which really touched me. The fact of the matter is science explains how, not necessarily why. Why is for theology and philosophy.

But it is attacking this fossil as a link which represents an attack on all science. Evolution yes is a theory, just like general relativity. Each has so far proven to be up to the challenge of explaining what it is we observe in nature. Evolution explains derived traits (notice how mammals produce milk?) and the fossil record as best as we can see. Just as general relativity explains why GPS satellites need to be set backward a few seconds so they coincide with our clocks due to their speed and orbit above earth. Yet I would be surprised if anyone would challenge that theory because of how accurately it explains the natural world (which evolution, as far as we can tell, does!).

Do I believe this story is over-hyped? Like many stories in the news, very much so. However it seems the outpouring against it, like many other evolution-backing stories and evidence, is just as overblown.

Kevin, Long Island, NY (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:41 PM)

this is truly amazing how synical you all are and your all high and mighty to, I studyed at harvard I am into biblioligy, I belive in creation, well if you wanna belive in GOD someone you have never seen or even had proof that he existed but not proof that's placed right in front of you then think about how truly stupid YOU REALLY MUST BE mister harvard and yale and brown and person who studies apes and creation.

Michael Judd, Jacksonville, Florida (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:42 PM)

I disagree with the comment that science and theory are not the same. There must be theory to ignite science. You cannot you apply science without question, which translates to theorum. Chicken or the egg?

Gary Jones, Osceola, Iowa (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:45 PM)

Science should be letting evidence speak for itself not trying to prove your theory with dating techniques that cannot be proven or any present source of proof.Is their any proof that"Ida" is the age they say? Can tell what something had for lunch 47 million years ago? Yea right!Someone is seeing dollar signs, thats all.

Rick, Va (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:57 PM)

What a bunch of bunk. I think it will take a lot more research then they have given it. Science is not asumption. I have no trouble putting Creation and Evolution together because after all God has all the time in the world and can do it any way he wants but this is really jumping the gun.

Tamara Powell, Mauckport , Indiana (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 11:20 PM)

-* This is another pathetic excuse for mankind to deny the existance of there being a higher being (God) and/or creation by God.
-* Evolution is a religion and theory, therefore who can prove it? If there be a man who was here on Earth during the "big boom" let him come forward and prove it.
-* Ya scientists weren't here during the "big boom" so they can't prove it by looking at dirt and fossils...
-* All of the "missing links" have been hoaxes. For example the Piltdown Man was a jaw bone of a oragutan and it was combined with a human head... (probably ment to be a joke or prank to other scientists?)
-* This is my oppinion and some facts have come along with it. If I have attacked anything it is this "missing link." - Believe what you want and I will do the same.

Kyle Thomas, Watertown, WI (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 11:41 PM)

This fossil, and indeed the very concept of a "missing link" is over-hyped. Evolution is a transitional process; there will never be just one species linking us to apes. Besides, this particular species, if I'm reading the article correctly, links prosimians and simians. To consider this a missing link would be analogous to considering Cynognathus (an early therapsid) a missing link. While it is part of a family that bridges mammals and reptiles, no one goes around calling it a missing link between humans and reptiles. It's too far removed, just as this fossil is.

Joe Schmoe, Naperville, IL (Sent Tuesday, May 19, 2009 11:59 PM)

What a crock! No one can say how old anything is that still lives. Where are the eye witnesses? Some people believe anything. Oh yeah, and don't forget the financial backing that comes with even older dated fossils. Some people have too much time on their hands.

Teri Koury (Sent Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:00 AM)

No such thing as evolution. Remember the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: Everything is in decay. Also, mutations when they happen are usually dangerous and destructive. Man did not come from anything. Man was created by God. Earth only 10,000 or so years old, not millions, etc. Grand Canyon formed by The Great Flood (Noah's time), that is why there are all kinds of fossils in it's walls!

Lily, Honolulu, HI (Sent Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:05 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

NBC NEWS IN THE BLOGOSPHERE

	World Blog: Correspondents and producers on assignment share their insight on news events.
	First Read: Analysis of the day's political news from the NBC News Political Unit.
	Deep Background: The NBC News Investigative Unit blogs about national security, spies, and government fraud.

More Daily Nightly

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Earlier Daily Nightly entries

Categories:

CONNECT WITH US

About the broadcast | Biographies

RSS is an easy way to get the news you want as it is updated even if you are not on MSNBC.com. More information about MSNBC.com's RSS feeds.

Podcasting brings you audio and video from each weekday broadcast on your iPod or other portable MP3 player anytime, anywhere. More information about MSNBC.com's podcasts.

Sign-up for our daily e-mail newsletter. It offers a preview of the stories and special reports featured on each weekday broadcast.

Syndicate This Site

Add The Daily Nightly to your news reader:

ABOUT THIS BLOG