We’ve updated our Terms of Use to reflect our new entity name and address. You can review the changes here.
We’ve updated our Terms of Use. You can review the changes here.
supported by
/
  • Streaming + Download

    Includes high-quality download in MP3, FLAC and more. Paying supporters also get unlimited streaming via the free Bandcamp app.
    Purchasable with gift card

      name your price

     

  • Record/Vinyl + Digital Album

    The Science Slam Sonic Explorers present two different visions of the controversy behind the world's most famous fossil, IDA.
    Featuring Mina Caputo (Life of Agony) on vocals.

    Includes unlimited streaming of IDA via the free Bandcamp app, plus high-quality download in MP3, FLAC and more.
    ships out within 1 day
    edition of 500 
    Purchasable with gift card

      $20 USD or more 

     

1.
IDA 06:47
TEXT: In the year of Darwin 2009 A fossil was described Named Darwinius masillae Her nickname became IDA Her skeleton is complete Her body outline preserved And last meal in her stomach She lived 47 million years ago And she is a primate The scientists describing her Placed her on the line That much later Evolved into us This sparked a scientific controversy The group of primates where IDA belonged Are by most scientists Believed to be closer to lemurs 47 million years is a long time Most animals that lived so long ago Are crushed into unidentifiable pieces Some pieces survive But very fragmentary remains can not Tell the story like a complete skeleton. The scientific discussion Sums up to: - my fossil is more important than your fossil! Scientists say "nothing new in IDA" Others claiming that their single teeth, jawfragment or anklebone are much more important Scientists claiming that IDA is too crushed to tell anything (Without ever seeing the fossil) The more complete a fossil is the more difficult it is to fit it into the present interpretation of fragments Critics are seldom objective, usually scientists have hidden agendas (attack is the best defense) this is something the journalists should learn to understand The more furious a scientist is the more fragmentary are his own specimens... The philosophy behind IDA: "The nature of science" The scientists wanted to show the process of science not only the result A scientific paper is the start of a debate not the end Many scientists do outreach to impress their colleagues not to tell the public about their research The goal of the outreach In the IDA project was to move the perspective of non-specialists on human evolution from "something that happened a few million years ago in Africa" to "we have relatives 47 million years ago" = Evolutionary perspectives in deep time The last five years Have been like a very slow Tennis match Disagreeing scientists are arguing In different journals No one change their minds.... Ida is still the most complete fossil primate ever found no one disagrees on her beauty she is today in most textbooks but the controversy continues
2.
TEXT: In the year of Darwin 2009 A fossil was described Named Darwinius masillae Her nickname became IDA Her skeleton is complete Her body outline preserved And last meal in her stomach She lived 47 million years ago And she is a primate The scientists describing her Placed her on the line That much later Evolved into us This sparked a scientific controversy The group of primates where IDA belonged Are by most scientists Believed to be closer to lemurs 47 million years is a long time Most animals that lived so long ago Are crushed into unidentifiable pieces Some pieces survive But very fragmentary remains can not Tell the story like a complete skeleton. The scientific discussion Sums up to: - my fossil is more important than your fossil! Scientists say "nothing new in IDA" Others claiming that their single teeth, jawfragment or anklebone are much more important Scientists claiming that IDA is too crushed to tell anything (Without ever seeing the fossil) The more complete a fossil is the more difficult it is to fit it into the present interpretation of fragments Critics are seldom objective, usually scientists have hidden agendas (attack is the best defense) this is something the journalists should learn to understand The more furious a scientist is the more fragmentary are his own specimens... The philosophy behind IDA: "The nature of science" The scientists wanted to show the process of science not only the result A scientific paper is the start of a debate not the end Many scientists do outreach to impress their colleagues not to tell the public about their research The goal of the outreach In the IDA project was to move the perspective of non-specialists on human evolution from "something that happened a few million years ago in Africa" to "we have relatives 47 million years ago" = Evolutionary perspectives in deep time The last five years Have been like a very slow Tennis match Disagreeing scientists are arguing In different journals No one change their minds.... Ida is still the most complete fossil primate ever found no one disagrees on her beauty she is today in most textbooks but the controversy continues

credits

released July 27, 2014

license

all rights reserved

tags

about

Science Slam Sonic Explorers Basel, Switzerland

contact / help

Contact Science Slam Sonic Explorers

Streaming and
Download help

Report this album or account

If you like Science Slam Sonic Explorers, you may also like: