Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Israeli researchers: 'Lucy' is not direct ancestor of humans
jpost.com ^ | 4-16-2007 | JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH

Posted on 04/16/2007 8:51:39 AM PDT by bedolido

Tel Aviv University anthropologists say they have disproven the theory that "Lucy" - the world-famous 3.2-million-year-old Australopithecus afarensis skeleton found in Ethiopia 33 years ago - is the last ancestor common to humans and another branch of the great apes family known as the "Robust hominids."


The jaw bone of Lucy and the jaw bone of Australopithecus afarensis.

(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: ancestor; bloodbath; crevo; crevolist; dlrhumor; evolution; fsmdidit; godsgravesglyphs; humans; ignoranceisstrength; israeli; lucy; researchers

1 posted on 04/16/2007 8:51:43 AM PDT by bedolido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bedolido

“Lucy, you got some ‘splainin’ to do.”


2 posted on 04/16/2007 8:52:27 AM PDT by dfwgator (The University of Florida - Still Championship U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
It belongs to the ancestor of Nikolai Valuev
3 posted on 04/16/2007 9:01:31 AM PDT by giobruno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
1. The headline is wrong. The Israeli researchers didn't prove anything. They made a coherent argument based on a morphological analysis. That argument may or may not be accepted by the scientific community, depending on what other research may indicate.

2. Even if true, this isn't all that surprising. While we're all familiar with the simple linear evolutionary projections we see in elementary school textbooks, the fossil record is much more complex, filled with branches, dead ends, hybridization and other weird stuff. It's often hard to figure out the exact evolutionary path from a series of specimens.

4 posted on 04/16/2007 9:08:11 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam; FairOpinion; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 24Karet; 3AngelaD; 49th; ...
In before the bloodbath. :')

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

5 posted on 04/16/2007 10:29:54 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Monday, April 2, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Now THAT’S funny...


6 posted on 04/16/2007 10:44:53 AM PDT by Pharmboy ([She turned me into a] Newt! in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/07/1/l_071_03.html
http://www-tc.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/riddle/riddle.swf?mii=1


7 posted on 04/16/2007 10:55:54 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Monday, April 2, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Footprints to Fill:
Flat feet and doubts about
makers of the Laetoli tracks

by Kate Wong
August 1, 2005
Scientific American
The case for A. afarensis as the Laetoli trailblazer hinges on the fact that fossils of the species are known from the site and that the only available reconstruction of what this hominid's foot looked like is compatible with the morphology evident in the footprints. But in a presentation given at the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting in April, William E. H. Harcourt-Smith of the American Museum of Natural History and Charles E. Hilton of Western Michigan University took issue with the latter assertion.

The prints show that whoever made them had a humanlike foot arch, and the reconstructed A. afarensis foot exhibits just such an arch. So far, so good. The problem, Harcourt-Smith and Hilton say, is that the reconstruction is actually based on a patchwork of bones from 3.2-million-year-old afarensis and 1.8-million-year-old Homo habilis. And one of the bones used to determine whether the foot was in fact arched--the so-called navicular--is from H. habilis, not A. afarensis.

8 posted on 04/16/2007 11:20:06 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (I last updated my profile on Monday, April 2, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
“Lucy, you got some ‘splainin’ to do.”

That's just one of the many problems with dating an older woman.

9 posted on 04/16/2007 11:46:14 AM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx

That’s not what Helen Thomas says, a close friend of Lucy’s.


10 posted on 04/16/2007 12:54:34 PM PDT by elephantlips
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

I like your tag line, and how true that really is, we only think that gravity is the real ldeal, but at sometime in the future someone may show that it really doesn’t even exist but what attracts bodies is something different.


11 posted on 04/16/2007 5:19:57 PM PDT by stockpirate (A nation that doesn't honor it warriors will be defeated by a nation that does. (read my profile))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bedolido

Without the Israelis knowing all the Dems, how can they be so certain she wasn’t some folks ancestor?


12 posted on 04/16/2007 8:07:20 PM PDT by Sam Ketcham (Amnesty means vote dilution, & increased taxes to bring us down to the world poverty level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido; gobucks; mikeus_maximus; JudyB1938; isaiah55version11_0; Elsie; LiteKeeper; AndrewC; ...


You have been pinged because of your interest regarding news, debate and editorials pertaining to the Creation vs. Evolution debate - from the young-earth creationist perspective.
To to get on or off this list (currently the premier list for creation/evolution news!), freep-mail me:
Add me / Remove me

13 posted on 04/17/2007 9:47:11 AM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
filled with branches, dead ends

Ain't that the truth. Lies lead to deadends.

14 posted on 04/17/2007 10:44:30 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
Ain't that the truth. Lies lead to deadends.

Trilobites are a lie?

15 posted on 04/17/2007 10:57:28 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Interesting philosophical take, but not quite what I think I was getting at.


16 posted on 04/17/2007 10:58:21 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

“Trilobites are a lie?”

Trilobites are extinct arthropods.
Dead creatures tell no tales; they leave that to the archaeologists.


17 posted on 04/17/2007 11:15:23 AM PDT by E-Mat (Made in China = Arms for Tyrants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

“Interesting philosophical take, but not quite what I think I was getting at.”

I totally understood your point but wanted to get your thinking outside the box. Gravity is something we have recently described, and there may actually be something other than that at play.

At one time science did not believe that rocks fell from the heavens and tey said that it was “fold lore” and superstistion and nothing more.

They held this believe for almost 300 years.


18 posted on 04/17/2007 11:19:35 AM PDT by stockpirate (A nation that doesn't honor it warriors will be defeated by a nation that does. (read my profile))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
At one time science did not believe that rocks fell from the heavens and tey said that it was “fold lore” and superstistion and nothing more. They held this believe for almost 300 years.

Scientists denied the existence of meteors for 300 years? Who, when, where? I've never heard of this.


19 posted on 04/17/2007 11:26:11 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

They had a show recently on the History channel. And there is a church in France I think that has a rock that fell from space and someone actually watched it fall and where it landed.

The church has had the rock for several hundred years. And people come from all over to see the rock.

Before this time it believed that nothing fell from the sky ie rocks.

And when a rock was shown to be different it was said the ground was hit by lighting.

Google I am sure you can find it.

And FYI, they found a gold amulet in South America that is several hundred years old. And engineer made an exact model only 4 feet long, of this amulet with an engine on it and he could fly it. The amulet looks just like the space shuttle.


20 posted on 04/17/2007 1:17:39 PM PDT by stockpirate (A nation that doesn't honor it warriors will be defeated by a nation that does. (read my profile))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Oh here is something that may be the event mentioned on the show about when scientists started to study meteors as coming from the sky.

In 1883, many people were certain the sky was falling and the world was coming to an end. The Great Leonid Showers in 1883 gave spectators a dazzling display of fireworks that rained from the sky. It marked the beginning of scientific studies into meteors. The study of meteors is called meteoritics.


21 posted on 04/17/2007 1:20:44 PM PDT by stockpirate (A nation that doesn't honor it warriors will be defeated by a nation that does. (read my profile))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: elephantlips

Friend!?

More like Grandma!!


22 posted on 04/17/2007 2:06:15 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

Put a big enough engine on ANYTHING and you can ‘fly’ it!


23 posted on 04/17/2007 2:08:16 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
I fear God, but don't fear the genetic evidence that may,
or may not make evolution, or "development" a sound theory.
24 posted on 04/17/2007 2:31:23 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

No that is not the case, and ther were acually two amulets dna 4 ft models of both flew, as did the model of a wooden plane found in Eygypt over 100 years ago.

Or as was written long aog, “There is no new thing under the sun”


25 posted on 04/17/2007 2:52:54 PM PDT by stockpirate (A nation that doesn't honor it warriors will be defeated by a nation that does. (read my profile))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
Trilobites are a lie?

TROGLODYTE
-Jimmy Castor Bunch

What we're gonna do right here is go back, way back, back into time. When the only people that existed were troglodytes...cavemen...cavewomen...Neanderthal..troglodytes

Let's take the average cave man at home, listening to his stereo. Sometimes he'd get up, try to do his thing. He'd begin to move, something like this:

"Dance...dance". When he got tired of dancing alone, he'd look in the mirror: "Gotta find a woman gotta find a woman gotta find a woman gotta find a woman".

He'd go down to the lake where all the woman would be swimming or washing clothes or something. He'd look around and just reach in and grab one. "Come here...come here". He'd grab her by the hair. You can't do that today, fellas, cause it might come off. You'd have a piece of hair in your hand and she'd be swimming away from you (ha-ha).

This one woman just lay there, wet and frightened. He said: "Move...move". She got up. She was a big woman. BIG woman. Her name was Bertha. Bertha Butt. She was one of the Butt sisters. He didn't care. He looked up at her and said:

"Sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me sock it to me!".

She looked down on him. She was ready to crush him, but she began to like him. She said:

"I'll sock it to ya, Daddy". He said: "Wha?". She said: "I'll sock it to ya, Daddy".

You know what he said? He started it way back then. I wouldn't lie to you. When she said "I'll sock it to ya, Daddy" he said "Right on! Right on! Hotpants! Hotpants! Ugh...ugh...ugh"

26 posted on 04/17/2007 3:23:36 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

From Wikepedia:
The last of the trilobites disappeared in the mass extinction at the end of the Permian 250 million years ago

Yep, it’s a lie when they claim that they were in existence over 200 million years ago.


27 posted on 04/17/2007 5:48:45 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
The last of the trilobites disappeared in the mass extinction at the end of the Permian 250 million years ago Yep, it’s a lie when they claim that they were in existence over 200 million years ago.

Find me a more recent trilobite and I'll buy you lunch. Seen one recently by the sea shore?

28 posted on 04/17/2007 5:51:04 PM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Can’t find something that is a lie.


29 posted on 04/17/2007 10:00:34 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
Can’t find something that is a lie.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you arguing that Trilobites never existed or that they existed, but more recently than 250 million years ago?

If it's the latter, surely you can find a recent specimen. Right?

30 posted on 04/17/2007 10:08:59 PM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

More recent than your 250 million years.

http://www.creationism.org/caesar/trilobiteeye.htm


31 posted on 04/17/2007 10:56:35 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
More recent than your 250 million years. http://www.creationism.org/caesar/trilobiteeye.htm

You seem to have sent me the wrong link. Your article argues (erroneously, not that it matters) that trilobites were intelligently designed, rather than evolved. It says nothing about trilobites living less than 250 million years ago, a solidly demonstrable fact that I think even hard-core adherents of intelligent design would accept. I think you're confused.

32 posted on 04/17/2007 11:18:58 PM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Psst, psst. Creationism means young earth. Get it?


33 posted on 04/17/2007 11:58:44 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
Psst, psst. Creationism means young earth. Get it?

No, that's not true. There are young earth creationists and there are old earth creationists. I understand that you are a young earther, but nothing in the article you linked to argues against a 250 million year extinction date for trilobites. I'm afraid you're going to have to try again.

34 posted on 04/18/2007 12:13:57 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Trilobites are all dead just like dinaosaurs. Because you and evolutionists say they are millions of years old doesn’t make it so. For you to ask me to show you a younger one is really hilarious.


35 posted on 04/18/2007 12:34:19 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever; Alter Kaker

You would think that after watching all those episodes of the Flintstone’s that people would understand that man and dinosaur existed at the very same time.


36 posted on 04/18/2007 12:43:04 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
Trilobites are all dead just like dinaosaurs.

And dinosaurs are dead just like James Brown is dead. But not even you would claim dinosaurs and James Brown lived at the same time. The fact is, trilobites are consistently found in Paleozoic strata, layers of rock much deeper -- and consequently older -- than the rock in which we find fossils of dinosaurs.

Because you and evolutionists say they are millions of years old doesn’t make it so.

You're correct. The fact that multiple independent dating methods all come up with the same date for the fossils makes it so.

For you to ask me to show you a younger one is really hilarious.

Why is that? If you can find a trilobite and find a way to come up with a verifiable date for it that's less than 250 million years old, then you've won the argument. Until then, you're just spouting rhetoric.

37 posted on 04/18/2007 12:54:16 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
Why is that? If you can find a trilobite and find a way to come up with a verifiable date for it that's less than 250 million years old, then you've won the argument.

Look who is spouting rhetoric. You have no facts, only theory, to back up your claim. Besides, God's word is verifiable. An evolutionist's words aren't.

38 posted on 04/18/2007 9:49:38 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
“Lucy, you got some ‘splainin’ to do.”

Okay, that's the best line.
39 posted on 04/18/2007 9:51:38 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
You have no facts, only theory, to back up your claim.

What are you talking about? You can go anywhere in the world, cut through early-to-mid Paleozoic rock and find trilobites. That isn't theory, that's a fact.

Besides, God's word is verifiable.

What does God have to do with this? The Bible I have sitting on my desk seems to lack a Book of Trilobites.

40 posted on 04/18/2007 10:08:27 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
The Bible I have sitting on my desk seems to lack a Book of Trilobites.

Yeah, and it doesn't have elephant in it either but they are alive and well. Open that Book on your desk. Gathering dust doesn't lead to knowledge.

41 posted on 04/18/2007 10:14:55 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
Yeah, and it doesn't have elephant in it either but they are alive and well.

Perhaps you're discovering that the Bible is a great book, but it is not the only book. If you're interested in biology, or geology, or anthropology, or chemistry, or astronomy or any field involving any advanced study, you're going to need more than just the Bible. God doesn't say anything about trilobites, but we can dig them up, observe them, and apply our God-given powers of reason to learn quite a bit about them.

Open that Book on your desk. Gathering dust doesn't lead to knowledge.

I read my Bible every night, thank you.

42 posted on 04/18/2007 10:18:34 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
I read my Bible every night, thank you.

But the big question is, do you believe it?

43 posted on 04/18/2007 11:18:55 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever
But the big question is, do you believe it?

I do. The Bible, however, is pretty poor when it comes to gourmet recipes, driving directions or paleontology. Regarding trilobites, you'd be better off with a paleontology textbook. Need a recommendation?

44 posted on 04/18/2007 11:49:10 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

In the beginning, God created....

Now this is the part where you insert your findings.


45 posted on 04/18/2007 12:05:36 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

Well, I’ll turn it right around at you. How do you explain that trilobites are only found in paleozoic rock?


46 posted on 04/18/2007 12:30:53 PM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
How do you explain that trilobites are only found in paleozoic rock?

Call the rock what you want but don't expect me to believe that the age designation is fact. Matter of fact, it isn't a fact. It was designated a time frame by evolutionary scientists.

47 posted on 04/18/2007 1:03:03 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: bedolido

If my memory does not fail me, I visited the Chicago Museum of Natural History several years ago and Lucy was prominently presented in the display on human evolution.

I wonder how long it will take them to leave the display there before changing it after this new evidence presented.

Richard Leaky himself, one of the world’s most prominent paleo-anthropologist recognizes a problem with Lucy in a PBS Documentary almost 20 years ago. Quoting him :

“If pressed about man’s ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional species to man, including Lucy, since 1470 was as old and probably older. If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving”.


48 posted on 04/27/2007 9:07:28 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson