Ida

This is a retarded article about the Ida fossil: http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Missing-Link-Scientists-In-New-York-Unveil-Fossil-Of-Lemur-Monkey-Hailed-As-Mans-Earliest-Ancestor/Article/200905315284582?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15284582_Missing_Link%3A_Scientists_In_New_York_Unveil_Fossil_Of_Lemur_Monkey_Hailed_As_Mans_Earliest_Ancestor

and the comments are even more retarded, even correcting for the fact that this is sky news.

Ida is important, but the media have misunderstood and dramatically overstated that importance. It's not important as evidence for evolution, because there is already an overwhelming amount. It's evidence for a part of the tree of life, which just happens to involve animals quite closely related to us. Exciting, but not for the reason the media seems to think. This article exemplifies the complete misunderstanding of this story by the media.

Want to know what's even more retarded? Answers in Genesis chose this article as the one to illustrate the whole business of Ida. They didn't choose any of the ones in the scientific press that explained the significance of the fossil more accurately, they chose a cartoon.

Want to know what's even more retarded than that? Answers in Genesis lists several bullet points supposedly showing 'The Creationist Interpretation'. All of those points appear verbatim in the comments section of the sky news article, purportedly from different authors.

Perhaps lots of people read the AIG site and each chose a different comment to cut and paste without reference into the sky news comments. Or perhaps someone at AIG harvested some comments from sky news and quoted them without reference.

Or perhaps someone is lying for jesus again?