“JUSTIN de Freitas” fast and fancy foot works have amazed me. He stated in his June 27th letter to me (and I quote), “None of my debunkers said that the Darwinius masillae was the missing link”. Yet his letters indicate there is a missing link somewhere. Incidentally, the name Darwinius masillae was the name given to “Ida” in honour of Charles Darwin.

In his letter on May 23rd in this column, “Justin de Freitas” called “Ida” a “transitional fossil” and then said “we had “Ida” and today we have humans”. He was clearly making the connection that “Ida” was the link between lower and higher primates. On May 30th in this column, he said that ‘Ida” is a “transition to anthropoid primates” (higher primates).

In his letter June 1st in this column and June 4th in Kaieteur News, he stated that “I am upset that Darwinius masillae being the missing link”. He went on to state that “I have no use for the facts regarding the fossilised missing link”.

His tag-team partner “Gossai” defended the “Ida” fossil in his June 8th letter in Kaieteur News and June 14th letter in this column when I wrote that Chris Beard said that further studies will show that “Ida” belongs to the lemur group (lower primate) and is not a missing link.

Unless “Justin de Freitas” is suffering from short-term memory loss, this is some serious back peddling. Then in some bizarre way, “Justin de Freitas” seems to think I agree with him that “Ida” is a transitional fossil. Talk about spinning the facts! “Justin de Freitas” can use all the complex, scientific terms to sound smart. The fact is he dances like a butterfly and spins like a bee.

As Ian Tattersal head of the Natural Museum of History in New York City have said, the facts have proved that “Ida” is transitional only in the sense that it is connected to the lower lemur group (a relative of that group) and is not transitional in the sense of connecting lower and higher primates, proving it is not a missing link.
PASTOR DANIEL SINGH