Dr. Jorn Hurum of the Museum of Natural History and the University of Oslo speaks next to a slide of a 47 million year old primate fossil known as "Ida" at the Museum of Natural History in New York, on May 19. Scientists from the University of Oslo in Norway and the Senckenberg Research institute said the female specimen was the most complete fossil primate ever found.
(Mike Segar/Reuters)Photos (1 of 1)
Paleontologist as rock star: How one tiny fossil sparked a media circus
By Matthew Shaer | 05.20.09
Yesterday, media outlets across the globe pounced on the story of “Ida,” a 47-million-year-old fossil discovered in Germany by paleontologist Jorn Hurum. According to Hurum, the fossil could be evidence of a missing-link species – one that connects higher primates with creatures such as lemurs.
A LiveScience report, published on the MSNBC website, heralded the groundbreaking nature of the discovery:
The fossil, called Darwinius masillae and said to be a female, provides the most complete understanding of the paleobiology of any primate so far discovered from the Eocene Epoch, Hurum said. An analysis of the fossil mammal is detailed Tuesday in the journal PLoS ONE. “This is the first link to all humans … truly a fossil that links world heritage,” Hurum said.
Scientist or reality television star?
But almost as dazzling as the find itself was the way in which it was unveiled. The announcement was made with great fanfare at the Museum of Natural History in New York, and coincided with a peer-reviewed article about the discovery. And like any good reality television star, Hurum was thinking “cross-platform”: his team has a sleek website, an exclusive interview arrangement with ABC News, a book aimed at mainstream audiences, a deal with the History Channel, and a full-length movie about little “Ida.”
As Tim Arango wrote in the New York Times, this was “science for the Mediacene age.”
And the groundswell for the major-league media blitz had been building for weeks. The editors of Galleycat, a popular books blog, traced the whole thing back to the beginning of this month, when a “flurry” of activity on Twitter hinted of a “mysterious book known to booksellers (who received it in unmarked boxes with strict instructions not to open until today) only as “Project X”:
[Book promotion expert] Bella Stander quickly determined that “Lucy Highfield” was code for “Lucy, found in a high field,” a reference to the fossilized hominid discovered in 1974. A source at a national bookstore chain informed us that the actual author of the book might be Colin Tudge, a specialist in natural history and genetics, which further solidified that hypothesis concerning the book’s contents.
Weird science!
Now that his secret is out, Jorn Hurum has faced some criticism from his fellow scientists, who have called the hype “bad news.” Writing on his blog, biologist PZ Myers called the media circus “bad news, not because Ida is unimportant, but because it detracts from the larger body of the fossil record — I doubt that the media will be able to muster as much excitement from whatever new fossil gets published in Nature or Science next week, no matter how significant it may be.”
No apologies
Hurum isn’t exactly apologetic. At the press conference, he told the assembled reporters that any responsible “pop band is doing the same thing. Any athlete is doing the same thing. We have to start thinking the same way in science.”
<< McMaster declares victory; backs down in Craigslist case (Updated) | MainComments
2. David | 05.20.09
This ’scientist’ is an opportunist looking to get rich. And the media’s happy to play along, with their long history of unsophisticated scientific interpretation, as long as it fits their persuasion (evolution, child drug therepy, etc). We can only await the day that the internet finally marginalizes the MSM…
3. Karen | 05.20.09
You know, God is one smart cookie. He has given us this beautiful precious world that supports wonderful, mind expanding “entertainment” as we as humans explore the journey he has made for us. Whether it is contemplating the missing link or following the laws of the 10 commandments or the ideas of Buddah, they all fall under his domain. As a Christian I love new developments in science because they challenge the thoughts of his people. All creatures great and small the Lord God made them all.
4. Tim Hays | 05.20.09
I am an evolutionary scientist and I always knew that creatures such as this existed. However, it’s wonderful to see such a complete skeleton of a lemur from the Eocene era in one piece, as opposed to fragments that require use of imagination to piece together the appearance. The binocular vision, opposable thumbs, strong shoulder and thigh bones, ankle and more point to a very obvious transitional link as one limb in the evolutionary tree. As for a “missing link”, I wouldn’t exactly say it was missing, but I can understand that the paleontologists want to promote their find and calling it “missing link” will guarantee magazine covers.
10. Krispy | 05.20.09
Okay, first, I’ll bash the website: csmonitor.com. christian science? its a paradox definetly. next, this find is legit, as i have actually seen it in person, though at the time i hadnt thought much of it. also, finds like this are just more proof that Evolution is true, not creationism. or whatever it is called these days. besides, how could the world have been created in 5000 years? it has to have taken the full 46 billion years in order for life to have evolved this far. finally, god isn’t even real. if he was, why would this world have so much corruption? if he loves everyone, why does he let them die? and why is there a hell if everyone happens to be his children?
11. Stephen | 05.20.09
Wow Krispy. You packed a lot of attack in one paragraph. Though I’m not sure why. All this article speaks of is that a fossil was found (true) named Ida (true) that was revealed to the world in a media blitz not usually associated with science (true). No where in the article is there a debate about creationism, so why are you bringing it up? This story is all over the net, why did you come here to read it? I happen to read CSMonitor from time to time and find its writers are fair and balanced.
12. John | 05.21.09
The chances of finding something like this are slim. They may as well get all they can out of it. The reality of science is that it is all about the money — the funding. Any scientist who looks down on capitalizing on this discovery is a hypocrite.
14. Kubota Jushin | 05.21.09
Is it really the missing link? Because it seems a little far down the evolutionary scale.
Oh, Krispy, as an atheist, I’ll tell you why god allows corruption. Because if there is one, we’re ants to him and he can do as he darn well pleases. Therefore don’t stress it.
15. Kubota Jushin | 05.21.09
Also, I like Le’s comment.
It is kinda small.
Bet it was cute in real life.
16. Jimmy | 05.21.09
Science is just the proof that God is so much bigger than our finite human minds. I find it ironic that so many people have faith in the chance happening of so many sophisticated systems of life in the natural world, yet refuse to entertain the idea of(much less have faith in)a holy, righteous, omnipotent, and sovereign God who is the creator of all things.
What do you base your truth on for the case that God doesn’t exist? God does love everyone, as He is the Creator of all life. But He cannot bear to look on sin–it affronts His holiness. Sin separates us from God. Death, corruption,anything that this world system considers “bad” is a direct result of Adam and Eve’s original sin.
Furthermore, being a “child of God” necessitates that we are in the family of God–in other words, that there has been adoption into His family and that we call Him Father. God gives us the choice to accept or reject His open invitation into His family “by grace, through faith”. If we reject God, how can we be in His family, thereby giving us the RIGHT to be called a “child” of God?”
It’s really this simple:
How did we get here? God spoke the world into existence.
What went wrong? Man CHOSE to sin against God’s holiness.
What’s the answer? Jesus Christ.
Confessing with your mouth and believing in your heart that God’s Son, Jesus Christ, died on a cross JUST so that we could be forgiven and free, was buried, and rose again on the third day is what makes one a “child of God/a saint/one of the elect/one of the called/etc.”
Friend, this world is going to end one day. Nothing on this earth is going with us. We’re all going to give an account to God for each thing we’ve done in our life. We’re all going one of two places: Heaven or Hell. If you’re name is in the Book of Life, eternal joy is yours. If not, eternal torture and suffering await in Hell.
There is but one way to get to Heaven, and that is THROUGH Jesus who is the Christ.
Source: Holy Bible
17. Lou | 05.21.09
Hope this doesn’t have a “Woodward and Bernstein effect” on the world of science. After those two exposed the Watergate scandal, they became media rock stars, and thus prompted the beginning of our current age of sensationalist journalism. I hope this fossil doesn’t have the same effect on the scientific world, having every scientist trying to find the “next big discovery” so they can have their own contract from ABC, to the detriment of good science.
19. Krispy critic | 05.21.09
Krispy:
>Okay, first, I’ll bash the website: csmonitor.com. christian science? its a paradox definetly.
Christian Science is a specific religion, not “Christian science”, which dates back quite a while. The CSM was initially funded many years back by a Christian Scientist, and while there are apparently a number of Christian Scientists who work at the organization, the content itself is apparently secular, aside from a religious column, based on a Wikipedia summary I read.
I deeply regret the name of the CSM. I am an atheist and not particularly sympathetic at all to Christian Science (Mark Twain wrote a rather scathing critique, if you’re interested, and among other things, the religion advocates faith healing…which based on the Christian Scientists I know, tends to go out of vogue when people have major surgery to get done), but I am quite impressed with the CSM’s content and writing. It’s one of my favorite online publications and in a day when everyone seems to be constantly hammering a particular political or entertainment view, they do an impressive job of maintaining neutrality and informed writing. That being said, it had a huge barrier to overcome — every time I saw the name for a long time, I thought “Oh, yet another publication pushing religious propaganda…forget it”.
>besides, how could the world have been created in 5000 years
Even if the website were trying to advocate a Christian Science viewpoint with this article, it would not mean that it is advocating creationism; I do not believe that Christian Science holds to a creationist standpoint.
20. Common sense | 05.21.09
Those of you who avoid the truth every day i feel sorry for you. Evolution is real, factual and is the true of how this world has become. Unfortunately if one ever actually studied religion, not just christianity, one would understand. Until worlds population truely understands “religion” we will continue to have a mess of a planet because one thinks its alright to force it down peoples throats. Have faith. Facts are concrete.
21. Tony | 05.21.09
With regard to ‘Krispy’s’ comments I can quite understand the view that there is no God but may I suggest that Krispy reads ‘Science and Health’ by Mary Baker Eddy I am sure,this book will help the understanding.
22. Paul | 05.21.09
Krisply, I wouldn’t call Ida “proof” so much as “evidence.” Ida is further evidence our species (Homo sapiens) shares common ancestry with other primates. There is already substantial and significant evidence in support of that widely accepted theory.
Earth is closer to 4.6 billion years old than 46 billion. Multicellular life has only been around some 650 million years.
None of this really has any bearing on whether or not God is real.
23. Bose | 05.21.09
@Krispy Why are you bashing this website? It’s a respected, unbiased, news source having received multiple Pulitzer Prizes throughout its more than 100 years of publishing. Get your facts straight before you tried to “bash” something please. Also, where is 46 billion years coming from? The earth is roughly 4.5 billion years old.
As to the fossil at hand, it’s definitely an interesting find and will shed light on early primates. The method in which it was presented, with so much sensationalism, seems a bit overdone and hopefully will not overshadow the academic debate over it’s specific place in the primate family.
24. Tera | 05.21.09
What I want to know is why we are not funding goblin sharks and stiletto snakes?!
25. durka durka | 05.21.09
Why believe in God? He stems from a book of stories thousand of years ago. How could you believe in so much of fiction? If i spread the word of “George,” wouldn’t it be possible that he one day will become the Lord? So God must still be making things up, right? How do you explain evolution of one organism to another? How do you explain the “adapted” species that “succeeded?” To my knowledge, God created everything in one week, not over millions of years. It’s evolution, not God’s created figure.
26. bobxxxx | 05.21.09
“Just another animal that God created. Not a distant relative.”
Translation: I’m afraid of science. I’m afraid of reality. But I like my childish belief in “The Magic Fairy Did It.”
27. Krispy | 05.21.09
Okay, sorry about the typo of the earth being 46 bil years old. i didnt catch that.
Creationism was brought up because of the fact that this article is trying to say the find is a hoax. Read between the lines! It says that it is being publicized a bit too much. Aren’t all major finds in science pounced on by the media?
This find is definetly a major find! It links us to lemur ancestory.
And about god, i agree with ‘durka durka.’ How did god just create all the species in one week? if that was true, then evolution cant exist. if evolution didnt occur, we wouldnt be here.
Oh, and the guy preaching the bible: jesus christ is not an answer. how could he have existed? its not possible for a virgin birth amongst humans. and he cant have come back to life if he had existed. and so if jesus is taken out, then all humans are doomed to go to ‘hell’ because adam and eve sinned.
but if god created them, why would he make a flaw in the design by making the ability to sin even exist? why do we even know the word sin?
and no matter how much you confess, each and every single human on this planet is a sinner, no matter what. everyone is corrupt, even if they try not to be. how can god like these corrupt people?
28. ahmad | 05.22.09
don’t you Christians want to use your minds for one second? there are millions of evidence for evolution!!
29. gerald | 05.22.09
I agree that this article seems to subtley trying to debunk the find. Focus is on the media blitz instead of the fossil itself. Maybe there are other article on CSM about the fossil, but I haven’t seen them, sorry if I’ve made a false assumption. At the same time, if there wasn’t a “debate” over the validity of the theory of evolution then would the fossil have the legs to actually create a media frenzy?
Speaking of debates, I have a question for Jimmy and CSM censors, if God is omnipotent then doesn’t he already know whether or not I’m going to heaven or hell? If he doesn’t know, then he’s not omnipotent is he?
30. garydc | 05.22.09
they found a new extinct animal?so what,s with all the evo/creat debate?& just to throw fuel on the fire,the Bible says God made the heavens & the Earth,(Universe)found the Earth & took 6 “days” to fix it up–and apparently we’re still in the 7th day(it’s the only one not described as finished).where do folks get these numbers in the thousands of years for the whole shebang?human history,sure;but the cosmos is older.
31. Jason Loxton | 05.22.09
Hey, Krispy, you are reading something “between the lines” that isn’t there. This article is about the bizarre, orchestrated media circus that has surrounded Ida, not about Ida herself. The NY Times published a very similar article, and arch-atheist PZ Myers (quoted in this article) has made similar criticisms. As a PhD candidate in paleontology, I completely agree with all of them.
The public relations team behind this research group produced a full length movie, published a book, and compared the discovery to the moon landing!, all before actually publishing the damned thing. The danger is that, if the fossil turns out to be less important in understanding primate phylogeny than we currently think, then all this (undeserved) hype is going to do nothing other than provide ammunition for creations: “See! Another overblown evolutionist claim!” etc etc etc. It also misleads the public as to how science is done (real science is a critical process, hashed out in journals and at meetings, not press conferences) and overshadows the important work done daily by evolutionary biologists and paleontologists (myself included). This gives the public the false impression that the case for evolution is built on a handful of exceptional fossils.
Ida is beautiful, undoubtably important, but how important we won’t know until the whole community of vert paleontologists working on primates have had the chance to read the paper, examine casts, and evaluate for themselves.
Jason
BTW, the Christian Science Monitor is a well-respected secular paper. As an atheist, I sometimes to turn to it myself for interesting news.
32. editorial | 05.22.09
@gerald: Not at all trying to “debunk” the find. Was merely commenting, as Jason noted, on the manner in which it was unveiled.
33. gerald | 05.23.09
@editorial: thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my comment. again, i apologize if I made a false assumption. If there were more articles here on the actual fossil, I may not have come to the above conclusion. You do have “Science” in your name…
anyone out there care to answer this one:
“…if there wasn’t a “debate” over the validity of the theory of evolution then would the fossil have the legs to actually create a media frenzy?”
34. Eddie | 05.26.09
Of course now that another piece of concrete evidence has been found for the theory of evolution vice creationism, the religious are out to disprove it calling it another creation of god because they feel threatened. How much concrete evidence has there been for creationism? None. Of course I am not saying that “POW this proves evolution!” I still want more evidence, but it is one step closer. All hail his noodleness. RAMEN!
35. WEI | 05.30.09
we human being donot really understand what time is. Some already claimed that the earth were billion of years!God is beyond time and understand God first! Of course science is a good tool!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Paleontologist as rock star: How one tiny fossil sparked a media … | Contemporary Christian | 05.20.09
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. JAN | 05.20.09
YOU ARE SO-O-O-O WRONG!!!!! AND GET THIS OFF GOOGLE PAGE NOW!!!!!!