In the last few weeks ‘Ida’ has dominated the scene with even David Attenborough telling us on television that she is a key link leading back to our monkey-like ancestor.
But the evolutionary scientists are not of one mind on this point; many have stated that this remarkably preserved fossil is not a missing link at all: see, for example, http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17173-why-ida-fossil-is-not-the-missing-link.html.
Ida is akin to a monkey, with no grooming claw and lacking a toothcomb in its lower jaw. When did Ida live? Not 47.5 million years ago, as claimed. Its remarkably good preservation in rocks similar to ones in which bat fossils are found suggests rapid burial, probably in Noah’s Flood. Moreover, Ida’s foot bears no resemblance to something on the way to becoming human, in spite of media claims concerning its talus bone. It had an opposable thumb and was just like all lemurs and monkeys today.
Nothing about this fossil indicates that it was a human ancestor. Rather, it is a remarkably well-preserved lemur-like monkey with no connection to humans.
Besides, why would a fossil found 25 years ago suddenly become a media sensation? One suspects it may have something to do with financing a new book and television documentary about this remarkable fossil. Even peer reviewers of a scientific paper on Ida asked for the human-origins hype to be removed!
For a full exposé, visit http://www.answersingenesis.org/go/ida