Mark Henderson, science editor of the Times Online, recently wrote an article about Darwinius Masillae, once hailed earlier this year as the missing link. In the article Henderson reports that Darwinius Masillae, aka “Ida,” is not even a distant relative. Recent studies have shown that “Ida” is more like a lemur or a loris. Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University writes, “Our analysis provides no support for the claim that Darwinius is a link in the origin of higher primates, and instead indicates that, if anything, Darwinius is more relevant for our understanding of the origin of lemurs and lorises — which are our most distant primate relatives.”

What’s interesting is that if you watch an early documentary which touted Ida as the missing link–our supposed ancestor–you would probably find the documentary fairly convincing. In the film, the scientist seem so convinced that Ida is the “one we’ve been waiting for.” (Watch the a clip of the documentary below).

What’s disappointing when you read the article is what Henderson reports about the scientist, Dr. Jorn Hurum, who discovered Darwinius Masillae: Dr. Jorn Hurum sold film and book rights to the discovery before his findings were subject to peer review. Do you think that maybe he himself thought that Ida was not the one?

This whole incident reminded me about Piltdown man, whom I was first introduced to in my high school biology class back in 1983. He was once hailed as the missing link, and back then my high school teacher made me believe so. I thought that Piltdown man, along with the other icons of evolution (e.g. Miller-Urey experiment, Haeckel’s embryos, etc.) proved that evolution was true and that creation had no part in science, in the world and in my life. I don’t recall that my high school teacher told me that Piltdown man was a hoax (though he should have known at the time, since it was evidence was disclosed in 1953). I clearly remember that he didn’t mention the hoax behind Haekel’s embryos (the drawings were forged, not real). Neither did he tell me about the problems found in the Miller-Urey experiment (a Bio-physics Ph.D from UC Berkeley told me a few years ago). I’m all for science, and I love it when science reveals the truth. What concerns me, though, is when scientist use their trade to support a claim that they know is not true. And what angers me is when they do it and mislead the public into believing something that’s not true.

Ironically, science, not creationism, has shown that Piltdown man and other icons of evolution were false. And now it has caught another evolutionary scientist searching for an explanation.

I can’t wait for the next InterHigh Monthly. We’re going to look at the universe and consider the teleological argument for the existence of God.

William Kang, InterHigh