no, it was a mistake, but one made purposely because the religion of evolutionism needs to continually be propped up....
and as usual, evolutionism, wrong again..
the same science you praise for saying this is a mistake, is the same science that said it was a missing link in the first place...hardly a triumph...
FAIL.
>>no, it was a mistake, but one made purposely because the religion of evolutionism needs to continually be propped up....<<
You think one data point out of billions makes that much of a difference in TToE? And this is at most a classification mistake — and the fact it might be a mistake has been posited and remains to be seen.
>>and as usual, evolutionism, wrong again..<<
Nope — just a single finding that may or may not fill in a small part of the overall picture.
>>the same science you praise for saying this is a mistake, is the same science that said it was a missing link in the first place...hardly a triumph...<<
The scientific method did what it was supposed to. That is why there is peer review: to ensure that something is not added to the body of science until it has passes rigorous muster.
>>FAIL.<<
Yes — you FAIL to understand the simplest thing about science. As for science: SUCCESS.