The truth, of course, is that what science has unearthed is simply a previously unseen fossil. Believing it to be a missing link, or a transitional fossil, is predicated not upon science, but an a priori acceptance of the Darwinian storyline.
If you believe that all living things descended from the same common ancestor (trace your family tree back far enough and you’ll be related to, well, a tree), the discovery of a fossil we don’t recognize is naturally interpreted to be some intermediate link between species. If you reject the Darwinian storyline that assumes without observable evidence that various animal kinds evolved from one to another, the new fossil is interpreted to be a primitive species that has gone extinct.
Neither side ignores science, they merely interpret the scientific find differently based on their presuppositions.
This works the other way too. Take as an example what recently appeared on the Smithsonian Channel documentary “Secrets.” The first episode discussed new scientific data that makes a very compelling case for the existence of the Biblical “Tower of Babel.” Just like the ancient city of Jericho, Biblical skeptics had long considered this account a fantasy or historical inaccuracy. And now, just like the city of Jericho, the evidence has emerged.
Biblical scholars have long debated whether the Tower of Babel really existed. Now, a remarkable stone tablet never before shown on film appears to settle that question.
The stone tablet comes from the private collection of a wealthy businessman in Norway, and has been studied and analyzed by history professors and experts on Babylonian culture. That analysis has yielded the conclusion that:
Here we have for the first time an illustration contemporary with Nebuchadnezzar II’s restoring and enlargement of the Tower of Babel, and with a caption making the identity absolutely sure. We also have the building plans, as well as a short account of the reconstruction process. The text also mentions the restoration of the E-ur-imin-anki ziggurat in Borsippa, once believed by some scholars to be the Tower of Babel.
Notice that last line says “some scholars” believe this to be the Biblical Tower of Babel. Those would be the ones who trust the authenticity, accuracy, and authority of the Biblical text. Those scholars who don’t will undoubtedly come up with a different explanation for the tablet and the inscriptions.
While I would argue that neither side is ignoring science, but simply choosing to interpret the science in a way that yields two different conclusions, that intellectual honesty is never forthcoming from those academics who have a preconceived antipathy towards the Bible. They are the ones who shout “science denier” at anyone who interprets data in a way contrary to their secularist dogma.
Perhaps it would only be fair to shout the same at them regarding this new compelling confirmation of the Biblical Babel?