Originally Posted by DeltaBlack22
In reference to your first paragraph here, I am just trying to convey that there in a very large bias toward creating a "missing link". This is important in all actuallity because people believe what they see. Take a T-Rex for example. If I drew a picture of him with feathers all over his head and giant fish scales on his body, any 5 year old boy would be able to tell me "thats not what a T-Rex looks like". But do we really know? Pictures like the one posted above are printed in text books and I know growing up my science teachers tought this crap as fact, and not a debatable topic.
I think my brain may be deprived of oxygen, because I still dont follow your second paragraph. Fish bones arent human bones and if I picked up a fish spine and told you it was a fossilized tail bone from a predecessor of modern man you would probably laugh at me. I dont understand what is up for discussion. Who cares what I call it, it doesnt change what it is... If I am way off base and not getting what you are trying to say - just say so and I'll move on. This is just my final attempt at clarifying.
So what would you propose? Draw nothing just show a pile of bones? Or not even bother finding the bones? People will always want to connect to dots. Sometimes people connect the wrong dots and have to go back and fix them. Science is a work in progress. Personally I would love to find something that would change the way scientists view life, that is why I study this stuff. I personally do not study things just to reinforce a belief I already have, I study things to find something new, something that has been missed. On the other hand there are people out there who already have their belief. The believe the earth was created 6000 years ago in six days and therefore must try to fit everything into that mold. Step back for a moment, try to view it from an outside perspective and see who seemed to be biased to creating anything? I am fine with whatever evidence I find, I do not have to fit any of my observations into a particular mold, do you?
Now onto the debate of a species. Species is a word defined by humans, different humans define it differently and therefore it becomes debatable. There is no one final word on what a species is so it will continue to be up in the air. Some people say a species is any group of organisms that can interbreed. However bacteria do not breed (atleast in the way most people would think) so how do you define a species of bacteria? Also you can breed a lion and tiger together yet they are considered different species. We do not know anything about the breeding habits of extinct species so people find different ways to define what they consider a species. In the end the term can be debated, although it would not be debated in the extreme example you gave there are plenty less extreme cases that would debateable.
