No family resemblance here

E-Mail

Comments (0)

Text Size:

tool goes here

Regarding "Primate fossil 'Ida' far from human ancestor, report says" (Oct. 22, Page B-7): Oops, "Ida" isn't on the same branch of the primate family tree as humans after all.

The Darwinists so desperately need "Ida" or a friend of Ida's to substantiate what they preach as truth when it is in fact, at best, only theory. What we (and unfortunately our children) are told as fact is we evolved from apes (Darwin's book, "The Origin of Species"). However, there is no paleontology (fossil remains) support for this "fact." Let me say that again, there are no fossil remains that support we evolved from apes -- none. Zilch.

Rather than accept the idea of "intelligent design -- Oh my God, maybe there is God!" they continue to pray (yep) they find an "Ida" so they do not have to concede the miracles of life and all that we find valuable is a blessing of God.

AP - ** HOLD FOR RELEASE UNTIL 1 p.m. EDT WEDNESDAY OCT. 21, 2009 ** FILE -- A May 19, 2009 file photo shows Dr. Jorn Hurum speaking to reporters as a photo of "Ida", the 47 million year old fossilized remains of a primate, is projected on a screen during a news conference at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York reports in Nature the results of studies by Seiffert and his colleagues indicate "Ida" does not belong in the same primate category as monkeys, apes and humans. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)