Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Artistry of 'Ardi' (was artistís depiction of Ardi manipulated to promote evo-religion?)
ICR News ^ | October 15, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

Posted on 10/15/2009 8:22:54 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Reconstructions of animals based on fossilized remains are interesting and can be of value. However, they are notoriously subjective. Recent research suggested, for example, that many longstanding dinosaur reconstructions were almost double the size of the actual dinosaurs.[1] And similar distortions are evident in presentations of the fossil world’s latest superstar.

Artist sketches and other renderings of “Ardi,” the newly proposed replacement for Lucy as man’s distant evolutionary ancestor, convey more than the raw data. Of the many Ardipithecus ramidus fossil bones and fragments that were collected from 35 individuals along the Awash River in Ethiopia, a female was chosen to represent the species.

Several features of an artist’s depiction of Ardi may have been orchestrated to facilitate her acceptance as an evolutionary icon. First, Ardi is show with obvious...

(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: anthropology; antiscienceevos; belongsinreligion; catastrophism; catholic; christian; corruption; creation; evangelical; evolution; evoreligion; intelligentdesign; judaism; moralabsolutes; notasciencetopic; paleontology; propellerbeanie; protestant; science; templeofdarwin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 10/15/2009 8:22:55 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 10/15/2009 8:23:50 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

My favorite evo “missing link” story so far has been the finding of a tooth that led to the museum depiction of this ape-man’s “family life” in a display.


3 posted on 10/15/2009 8:24:09 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

gee, big surprise, more ‘hand-waving- and ‘just-so’ stories from the big Lie.....

even that dunce, darwin, would have to laff at how far they go today to prop up his original failed ideas of the religion of evolutionism.


4 posted on 10/15/2009 8:27:11 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts; SunkenCiv; KevinDavis

That is actually a very very good article.


5 posted on 10/15/2009 8:27:16 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Research shows that men notice nude images. Advertising strategies have made extensive use of the observation that “erotic, suggestive and nude female models have a particularly strong attention-getting impact among male consumers.”3 Though Ardi is not presented in an erotic or suggestive posture, she is certainly nude. What better way to attract attention than to portray Ardi with overt human female characteristics?

Maybe they should have named the fossil Titsenass rather than Ardi.

6 posted on 10/15/2009 8:33:12 AM PDT by HerrBlucher (Obamanos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

A FReeper declaring Ardi “not guilty” in 5, 4, 3, ...


7 posted on 10/15/2009 8:35:24 AM PDT by WV Mountain Mama (The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits. Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

Yeah, craaaaaaazy that she is depicted nude. She should have just gone to the closest Gap or J Crew for for the latest Paleolithic fashion.


8 posted on 10/15/2009 8:37:46 AM PDT by snowrip (Liberal? YOU ARE A SOCIALIST WITH NO RATIONAL ARGUMENT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Probably a bit closer than your belief in “Fred Flintstone”


9 posted on 10/15/2009 8:51:35 AM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Why thank you, GL :o)


10 posted on 10/15/2009 8:51:42 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Well it is. Its a very well written article, very clear and precise.


11 posted on 10/15/2009 8:54:02 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: snowrip

They went out of their way to sex Ardi up to attract attention, good marketing, but science? LOL!


12 posted on 10/15/2009 8:56:04 AM PDT by HerrBlucher (Obamanos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: snowrip

“She should have just gone to the closest Gap “

or,,, the Burlington Coat Factory store in Columbus! Free stuff!


13 posted on 10/15/2009 9:01:09 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Ardi’s going to do a remake of the movie classic, “The Three Faces of Eve”, but this go round, “The Dirty Dozen” gets worked in to the song, “I Ain't Got No Body” but will as soon as one is imagined for her/them.

But the book deals better be inked in a hurry because a big new find, possibly new species, it on the way from China and it isn't a new receipe for Peking Duck.

14 posted on 10/15/2009 9:12:07 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

Maybe Hairy-ette?


15 posted on 10/15/2009 9:13:56 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
In the posted portion of this article, there are several intentional misstatements.

1. Ardi does not replace Lucy but is a likely ancestor to her as well as to later hominids.
2. Ardi was most likely female, this was not a choice of the artist or the "evolutionist conspiracy".
3. The artist was constrained by the fossils recovered both in terms of size and facial construction. Also, the reconstruction was of one individual fossil. The small canine tooth gives the face a distinctly different look than a chimp. The upright posture is determined for the fossil as well. Ardi was bipedal.

Normally I don't allow distractions while worshiping at my home temple to Darwin, but this article started out with just too much intentional BS.

16 posted on 10/15/2009 9:23:46 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

Everything GGG posts is an “intentional misstatement”


17 posted on 10/15/2009 9:25:35 AM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Did any of the creat gang actually watch the show last Sunday night?


18 posted on 10/15/2009 9:44:49 AM PDT by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wacka

Brian Thomas* certainly did not.


19 posted on 10/15/2009 9:45:38 AM PDT by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

Zinjanthropus boisei


20 posted on 10/15/2009 9:48:35 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
Everything GGG posts is an “intentional misstatement”

While this is certainly true, I'm most interested in ICR's creepy fascination with the fact that Ardi is depicted without clothes. Enough to write a whole ICR article about it.

Instead of dismissing an important fossil discovery as "too pornographic," why not publish the ICR stance of what the fossils represent. The first half should deal with ICR's dating techniques and how they arrived at them, then a discussion on how ICR would have happened upon the fossils with what they "know" about the 10,000 year old earth and the big flood and why they thought the fossils would be where they were, followed by an explanation as to why Ardi was created and finally perhaps what Ardi should be wearing. A fig leaf perhaps?

The fossils were discovered a full 15 years ago. Does ICR and its adherents believe that it took 15 years to sex the fossils up and create the pan-global conspiracy about who/what Ardi was, or do they accept that sometimes science takes a while to sort itself out. And, depending on that answer, do they feel comfortable dismissing the entire discovery within days of publication with a hastily written op-ed?
21 posted on 10/15/2009 9:52:26 AM PDT by whattajoke (Let's keep Conservatism real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

And you missed the blatant deception in the first paragraph: “Recent research suggested, for example, that many longstanding dinosaur reconstructions were almost double the size of the actual dinosaurs.” If you follow the link, you’ll find that the study referred to body mass, not “size.” Brian wants us to think that dinosaurs weren’t really as big as depicted, when all that’s being suggested is that they might have been skinnier.


22 posted on 10/15/2009 10:00:45 AM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

Neanderthal wore Gucci and Cro-magnon wore Polo.


23 posted on 10/15/2009 10:09:54 AM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


24 posted on 10/15/2009 10:17:09 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Artist sketches and other renderings of “Ardi,” the newly proposed replacement for Lucy as man’s distant evolutionary ancestor, convey more than the raw data.”

—In what way is it a “replacement”? This seems to be a bizarre, but common, misunderstanding from a number of Creationist sources. I haven’t seen any scientists claiming that Lucy isn’t an ancestor just because Ardi may be. It’s not as if they are in competition.

“Of the many Ardipithecus ramidus fossil bones and fragments that were collected from 35 individuals along the Awash River in Ethiopia, a female was chosen to represent the species.”

—Well duh; Ardi is by far the most complete specimen of the species found. As for her being given “human” breasts, they actually appear to be more inspired by chimpanzee breasts.
(The link to the picture in the next to last paragraph kinda shows that, although the pics are crude. Also notice that Au. afarensis is between humans and Ar. Ramidus showing that Lucy has in no way been ‘replaced’.)


25 posted on 10/15/2009 10:19:11 AM PDT by goodusername
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
==1. Ardi does not replace Lucy but is a likely ancestor to her as well as to later hominids.

Replacement is a perfect word. The Temple of Darwin has kicked Lucy to the back of the bus, and replaced her with Ardi. C. Owen Lovejoy explains the reasons for this evo-religious update in Science:

"Even as its fossil record proliferated, however, Australopithecus [Lucy and her friends] continued to provide only an incomplete understanding of hominid origins. Paradoxically, in light of Ardipithecus, we can now see that Australopithecus was too derived—its locomotion too sophisticated, and its invasion of new habitats too advanced—not to almost entirely obscure earlier hominid evolutionary dynamics."

http://creationsafaris.com/crev200910.htm#20091002a

==2. Ardi was most likely female, this was not a choice of the artist or the "evolutionist conspiracy".

"Most likely"?...LOL! Where do you suppose they found her human-shaped breasts, and the rest of her human looking sex organs?

==3. The artist was constrained by the fossils recovered both in terms of size and facial construction. Also, the reconstruction was of one individual fossil. The small canine tooth gives the face a distinctly different look than a chimp. The upright posture is determined for the fossil as well. Ardi was bipedal.

LOL...Ardi's fossils were supposedly trampled by what they suspect was a herd of hippos, and were in such poor condition that they fell apart or turned into dust at the slightest touch. Indeed, the fossils were in such poor condition that it took your Temple of Darwin co-religionists over 15 years to reconstruct Ardi, and only then with digital reconstruction technology. And after all that, this is all they were able to come up with:

And from that, somehow the evo-artist came up with this...LOL!!!


26 posted on 10/15/2009 10:35:01 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
we can now see that Australopithecus was too derived—its locomotion too sophisticated, and its invasion of new habitats too advanced—not to almost entirely obscure earlier hominid evolutionary dynamics

What this means is that Lucy must have had bipedal ancestors and Lucy was not the hominid that signaled the break between the evolutionary line leading to humans on one side and apes on the other.

Ardi's fossils were supposedly trampled by what they suspect was a herd of hippos, and were in such poor condition that they fell apart or turned into dust at the slightest touchThis is why, in the interest of accuracy, Tim White took so long to complete his study. In other creationist diatribes, I have read the critique that White was reporting "old" news since the fossil had been discovered in the 1990's. These rim shots are exactly why I seldom engage creationists in any debate. Your ridicule is your best weapon. I really don't know how else a female would be portrayed other than how ardi has been.

Bye now, I have got to sacrifice a titmouse to my bust of Darwin.

27 posted on 10/15/2009 11:08:19 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
The Ardi skeleton is entirely a manipulation as the fragments of bone were cast and cut to fit after being digitally reshaped. Some 36 individuals were represented in the dig so what parts belong to Ardi?

“Oldest Skeleton of Human Ancestor Found
Jamie Shreeve
Science editor, National Geographic magazine
October 1, 2009
Move over, Lucy. And kiss the missing link goodbye.
While important, however, none of those earlier fossils are nearly as revealing as the newly announced remains, which in addition to Ardi’s partial skeleton include bones representing at least 36 other individuals.”

news.nationalgeographic.com/.../091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html

Interesting question!

“Q. Pieces of Ardi were smashed and damaged when found. How can one possibly reconstruct a skeleton, particularly the skull, from all of these fragments?
A. Thankfully, modern technology has significantly improved our options for resolving this problem. Professor Gen Suwa in Tokyo set up a micro-CT lab in which the crushed bones were scanned. From these scans, the individual bone fragments were digitally put back into anatomical position. The work required amazing attention to detail and took years to reach consensus among the hominid team. (I studied the monkey fossils, so I watched this part of the analysis from the sidelines). Simultaneous to the micro-CT research, Professor White worked with plaster casts of the squashed specimen, cutting the plaster pieces apart and then gluing them back together into anatomical position. After years of this meticulous work, White and Suwa compared their two reconstructions and found that they had reached the same configuration. It was a nice way to independently test their abilities to reconstruct such damaged fossils.
www.physorg.com/news173615221.html -”

The artist, skilled in reconstructions, added the missing bones according to the assembled skeleton, and then flesh according to the reconstructed complete skeleton.

The hair and breasts are entirely imagination.

28 posted on 10/15/2009 11:21:17 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

Be sure it’s a tufted one.


29 posted on 10/15/2009 11:21:20 AM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Ardi displaces Lucy as oldest hominid skeleton

“The novel anatomy that we describe in these papers fundamentally alters our understanding of human origins and early evolution,” said anatomist and evolutionary biologist C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University, a scientist with the project. In a summary article in Science, Lovejoy wrote that these and other behaviors “would have substantially intensified male parental investment a breakthrough adaptation with anatomical, behavioral, and physiological consequences for early hominids and for all of their descendants”

The last line is typical of the puffery of Ardi from a crumbling bone fragments into something phantasmagorical.

www.bio-medicine.org/.../Ardi-displaces-Lucy-as-oldest-hominid-skeleton-10222-2/ -

30 posted on 10/15/2009 12:05:27 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

==Bye now, I have got to sacrifice a titmouse to my bust of Darwin.

Finally, an honest evo ;op


31 posted on 10/15/2009 12:07:21 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA; count-your-change

PS See the last couple of replies by C-Y-C.


32 posted on 10/15/2009 12:08:44 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA; count-your-change
PS The following from the evo-religious, race-baiting, anti-semitic, global warming alarmists over at National Geographic bears repeating:

"Move over, Lucy. And kiss the missing link goodbye."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html

33 posted on 10/15/2009 12:16:20 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Reverse position of the last two lines of my post as follows:

www.bio-medicine.org/.../Ardi-displaces-Lucy-as-oldest-hominid-skeleton-10222-2/ -

The last line is typical of the puffery of Ardi from a crumbling bone fragments into something phantasmagorical.
(this is my comment, not part of the article)


34 posted on 10/15/2009 12:18:38 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
The hair and breasts are entirely imagination.

They should probably have put black bars over Ardi's chest and hips, just to avoid getting ICR all hot and bothered.

35 posted on 10/15/2009 12:20:22 PM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

What is their fascination with 4.4 million year old hominid sex organs?

I will hold my tongue on any further comments I could make.


36 posted on 10/15/2009 12:31:47 PM PDT by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
What this means is that Lucy must have had bipedal ancestors and Lucy was not the hominid that signaled the break between the evolutionary line leading to humans on one side and apes on the other.

"Move over, Lucy. And kiss the missing link goodbye."

I think that my statement is saying the same thing as does the NG Magazine, except I like my phrasing better as it isn't sensationalist. By the way, hominid fossils some one million years earlier than Ardi have been discovered. A search is ongoing for more complete remains. Poor Ardi has a limited time in the sunshine of creationist hatred.

37 posted on 10/15/2009 12:38:35 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
...First, Ardi is shown with obvious breasts that look essentially like those of human females, albeit hairy.....

Go to the article and check out the picture. If those breasts are "like those of human females", then they're 110 year old human females !

What a stretch !

38 posted on 10/15/2009 12:43:05 PM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
I can't speak to ICR’s ardor for Ardi but their observation appears to be quite correct:

“What better way to attract attention than to portray Ardi with overt human female characteristics?”

You might wonder why a bag of bones becomes personalized or a fossil named Ida after a young girl or why the Chinese fossils don't pick up personal names (I don't recall any, but my memory isn't so good as when I was only a few million years old)

Remember, No lusting after Lucy either!!

39 posted on 10/15/2009 12:45:18 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
...with what they "know" about the 10,000 year old earth and the big flood...

You HERETIC !! Everybody knows the exact date was October 23, 4004 BC, which makes the earth 6013 years old !!

Blasphemer !!

Sorry, just had to throw that in...

40 posted on 10/15/2009 12:48:11 PM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
LOL! Where do you suppose they found her human-shaped breasts, and the rest of her human looking sex organs?

I'm curious, do you not accept that the Ardi fossil is a mammal? I suspect that you do. In light of that, can you please give us the main characteristics of mammals. Thanks.
41 posted on 10/15/2009 1:06:34 PM PDT by whattajoke (Let's keep Conservatism real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Replacement is a perfect word. The Temple of Darwin has kicked Lucy to the back of the bus, and replaced her with Ardi. C. Owen Lovejoy explains the reasons for this evo-religious update in Science:”

—It sounds like you are trying to defend ICR and creationsafaris by changing what they mean by “replacement”. They don’t appear to mean it in some metaphorical sense as just meaning that Ardi may now be more famous or in some ways more important; they seem to mean it as Lucy literally being replaced in the evolutionary chain leading to us.

Creationsafaris especially makes it clear what they mean:
“The scoop is this: Lucy had nothing to do with our family tree after all. She and her kinds were on a separate branch that did not lead to us.”

As usual, creationsafaris and ICR didn’t do their homework and are clueless.

Even in the sense that you seem to mean it, ‘replacement’ is a odd and extremely misleading word. Both Lucy and Ardi are links in the chain. Each gives us unique information. When it comes specifically to the moment of the beginning of the Hominini (I hate the new terms), Ardi tells us more – because it’s closer to that event and has fewer derived features.

“”Most likely”?...LOL! Where do you suppose they found her human-shaped breasts, and the rest of her human looking sex organs?”

—Actually (as I explained in a previous post) I think they copied chimp breasts more than human ones.

“Indeed, the fossils were in such poor condition that it took your Temple of Darwin co-religionists over 15 years to reconstruct Ardi, and only then with digital reconstruction technology.”

—Actually, separate teams used different methods of reconstructing Ardi. One team used digital reconstruction, and another used plaster casts of the bones: “Restoration was undertaken independently using casts (Berkeley, CA) and digital data (Tokyo, Japan).”


42 posted on 10/15/2009 1:41:51 PM PDT by goodusername
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
An image accompanying a different Ardi report also looks suspicious. It shows a human, Lucy, Ardi, two chimps, a gorilla, and an orangutan side-by-side,5 arbitrarily arranged to reflect an imagined evolutionary line of descent. (See image by clicking here.) They are all shown as having the same height, an obvious inaccuracy since Ardi was only four feet tall and Lucy was even shorter. Was there specific intent to de-emphasize known height differences in order to make human evolution more palatable?

In America’s picture-driven culture, it is unfortunate to think that these images will form for many their major perception of this extinct primate. And it is most unfortunate that these images have been rendered to support the contention that Ardi is a human ancestor, when the scientific evidence really shows that Ardi was little more than a now-extinct four-foot-tall tree-dwelling primate.6


43 posted on 10/15/2009 2:01:59 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

[[Was there specific intent to de-emphasize known height differences in order to make human evolution more palatable?]]

Oh heck no! They would never, ever, use such deceptive means- oh wait- yeah they would and constantly do- never mind- carry on


44 posted on 10/15/2009 2:03:05 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
The silence is notable on why and how a primate living suitably in the trees would evolve feet that were less suitable for all purposes. Attributing behavior to a composite creature on the basis of a few fragments of bone is a perfect example of the just so story.

Looking at the back bone of Ardi....Wait...Ardi has no backbone.. the Artist, also known as The Illustrator, made a guess based upon modern bones (I seem to recall his saying human bones), so who knows just how tall the old gal was?

45 posted on 10/15/2009 2:14:03 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: goodusername; GodGunsGuts; count-your-change

—In what way is it a “replacement”? This seems to be a bizarre, but common, misunderstanding from a number of Creationist sources. I haven’t seen any scientists claiming that Lucy isn’t an ancestor just because Ardi may be. It’s not as if they are in competition.


Uhhh, that’s exactly what’s going on...shift and confiscate the science money from one fraud to another. SO of course they’re not in competition. Lucy’s done her job.

It’s supposed to be Ardi’s turn now.


46 posted on 10/15/2009 2:20:27 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; GodGunsGuts
Everything GGG posts is an “intentional misstatement”

...says FR's Al Sharpton. Or is it Sheila Jackson Lee?

47 posted on 10/15/2009 2:22:47 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
“This find is far more important than Lucy,” said Alan Walker, a paleontologist from Pennsylvania State University who was not part of the research. “It shows that the last common ancestor with chimps didn't look like a chimp, or a human, or some funny thing in between.”

Closet creationist no doubt. But that last line IS good, if RDy didn't look like “some thing in between” chimps and humans, what exactly does it look like?

48 posted on 10/15/2009 2:41:47 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA; GodGunsGuts; metmom; count-your-change; CottShop

These rim shots are exactly why I seldom engage creationists in any debate. Your ridicule is your best weapon.


Absolutely amazing.

Yeah....I can see how that would be soooo...

upsetting to evolutionists.

Calling that “old news”, and pointing out and observing the fossils are old and fraglie, that is just soooo over the top uncalled for and all.

I mean the nerve!

Wow, from the side of the aisle that often attacks and smears people like rabid dogs any and every time evolution is so much as questioned.

From the side that rushes to the courthouse to shut DOWN debate.

I bet you even said that with a straight face, huh?

Usually kind of a drive-by evo are you?


49 posted on 10/15/2009 2:50:10 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical

skinnier, but denser.


50 posted on 10/15/2009 2:51:02 PM PDT by PIF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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