Creationist Group 'Answers in Genesis' Disputes 'Lucy' Ancestry Claim

PJ Media ^ | 11/27/2015 | BY MICHAEL T. HAMILTON

[SeekAndFind]

Earlier this week Google's logo mutated (if you will) from its usual form into a Google Doodle adorned with a series of images depicting an ape evolving into a human. Clicking the Doodle led to information about "AL 288-1," less esoterically known as "Lucy the Australopithecus," or simply "Lucy." Many scientists regard the fossil as an intermediary link between apes and humans.

The same day, Googling "lucy australopithecus controversy" turned up a different interpretation of the fossil, including several from Answers in Genesis. The apologetics ministry, which focuses primarily on whether evolution or biblical creation provides the most accurate interpretation of the universe's origins, featured several articles Answers in Genesis staff has written about Lucy. The abstract of a 2012 article titled "A Look at Lucy's Legacy," by Dr. David Menton and Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, read:

Perhaps more than any other fossil, Lucy is presented as "exhibit A" for evolutionists in their attempt to show that humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor. With the recent opening of the Lucy exhibit in the Creation Museum, Answers in Genesis felt it was appropriate to present the "Lucy story" to our web visitors as well. This article will explore the origins of the fossils and interpretations by evolutionists that have led to overtly human-like representations of Lucy, such as at the Field Museum in Chicago, that differ so greatly from the equally valid representation at the Creation museum.

The authors went on to dispute claims as to Lucy's bipedality based on pelvic structure, the famous Laetoli footprints, and other points.

The site also featured a recent blog post by Ken Ham, the Answers in Genesis founder who debated Bill Nye ("The Science Guy") at the Creation Museum in Kentucky in 2014. Ham's article opened:

According to evolutionists, Lucy walked on two legs, and the group she represents is a distant ancestor of humanity (though how closely related is disputed even in their camp). US President Barack Obama even recently "met" Lucy and commented, almost reverently, on how she shows how all mankind is related to one another.

Ham's post included photographs of a Creation Museum exhibit demonstrating how covering Lucy's bones with different combinations of hair and skin drastically influences whether she resembles a human or an ape.

[Redmen4ever]

Your point - that what is infinitesimally possible is impossible - is valid. There is no good argument for evolution other than doctrinaire belief in evolution. People simply have to be open to miracles.

The Bible amazingly tells us there was not one miracle, but a series of them. Thus, the origin of the universe cannot be explained, nor is there a good explanation of life, nor of the Cambrian explosion of life, nor of the emergence specifically of photosynthesis, the higher forms of animals, nor the emergence of humans. None of these things is even remotely explained by science.

BUT having said this, the flimsiness of evolution doesn’t prove young earth creationism. Both of those viewpoints are overwhelmed by the scientific evidence. Old earth creationism is arguably consistent with the best evidence available, but, seems to conveniently interpret the Bible in order to reconcile science and revelation. This is only possible for the Bible. All other faith traditions are totally whack when it comes to science.

But, really, I don’t care about any of that. The sheer majesty of the creation speaks to the power, imagination and infinite care of the Creator. So, if the Biblical account is merely poetic, it’s o.k. by me.

[Former Fetus]

OK, so your problem is based on not believing the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. My advice would be, if you are open minded, to look at some of the ancient prophecy that has already been fulfilled. For example look at most of the prophecies of Daniel. You will see that they were fulfilled exactly, in some cases to the day. If that does not give you confidence the the Bible is the Word of God, then you are hopeless. Just do me a favor and stop calling those of us who believe in the Bible “dumb as a box of rocks”. Some of us are highly educated!

[ThePatriotsFlag]

Oh I get it. I thought we were talking about creation, but now you read the Bible to me. Great. This discussion is over.

[kublia khan]

So in the Bible it says something about remember the Sabbath for in six days God created and on the seventh he rested. It would appear that we are commanded (if the bible is anything more than toilet paper) to take 1000 years off. Im afraid that if those days were as you claim then God is not as omnipotent as He is presented to be. God wrote the law. On the otber hand if you don”t believe the Bible, what difference does it make. Truth in that case is ever changing and never immuttable, man is forever devolving into Anarchy. Evolution of the species would be a cruel joke if you were right.

[Former Fetus]

Is over. Are you ready for the consequences if you are wrong?

[vladimir998]

“Can’t- the bible talks about no ‘soul death’ before adam and eve- The only way billions of years could go by is IF God supernaturally kept Adam and Eve alive, and there is no evidence in His word that this was the case”

No. Adam and Eve were created on the last of the six days of creation - thus there need not be billions of years that had gone by even if you believe the days to have been billions of years long for there is no reason to think God rested for billions of years on the seventh day. Also, since Adam and Eve were created whole and entire as adults rather than as infants in the whom and were not afflicted by time with age until they sinned there is no reason to think they could not have lived for billions of years if God so wished. Also, I would shy away from the term “soul death” if I were you for in English it implies the death of a soul - which is logically impossible and against scripture since there is a Heaven and a Hell.

[Bob434]

[[BUT having said this, the flimsiness of evolution doesn’t prove young earth creationism.]]

Flimsiness? No- impossibility- It’s even Chemically impossible- in order for life to even have a chance of arising from chemicals, those chemicals need to be pure- there are no naturally occurring pure chemicals in regards to life ingredients- the only way life could have arisen was through, once again, a violation of natural law- in this case a supernatural purification of chemicals

[[doesn’t prove young earth creationism.]]

No, intelligent design and irreducible complexity do that

[[Old earth creationism is arguably consistent with the best evidence available,]]

Not so much- RadioHalos speak to a young earth- as do many other geological evidences- RadioHalos have stood up to peer review scrutiny for decades now- and show a rapid young earth creation- As well, every measure used to ‘date’ ages used by old earth proponents has serious flaws in them- and are unreliable- I can list them and their problems if you like- There is far more solid scientific evidence for young earth than for old earth- all the methods used for old age testing require a great deal of faith and belief- not hard scientific fact

[Bob434]

[[No. Adam and Eve were created on the last of the six days of creation]]

Again- God would have had to keep adam and eve alive for a couple billion years or 1000 years (where the bible states 1 day = 1000 years if this is what some claim days t mean in creation)

[[Also, I would shy away from the term “soul death” if I were you]]

There’s no need for me to stay away from it because the bible is clear about what kind of death happened before fall, and it wasn’t soul death- plants which have no soul died before the fall, those with souls did not

The term the bible uses is “nephesh.” it means soul- there was no soul death before the fall

[[Also, since Adam and Eve were created whole and entire as adults rather than as infants in the whom and were not afflicted by time with age until they sinned there is no reason to think they could not have lived for billions of years if God so wished.]]

https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/24-hours-plain-as-day/

Yes there is reason to think God didn’t infact keep them alive for billions of years

[[The top Hebrew scholars all agree that the writer of Genesis 1 intended the word day to mean 24 hours. If they all agree . . . then why can’t we?]]

[Iscool]

But when making this happen, did God have a clock and Timex himself? The people writing how creation happened in Genesis were writing to people as dumb as a box of rocks...so they used days instead of trying to explain eons an million year time sections. (Unfortunately, There are still some around as dumb as a box of rocks).

Guess that could apply to you as well, eh???

It's not only a matter of faith (or no faith) but believing in creation as written opens up vast sections of the scriptures that are forever hidden to you monkey-men...

[Iscool]

Let me summarize all the points of view:
Young earth creationists - Lucy, the dinosaurs, and all other forms of life now extinct must have been alive at the time of the flood. Carbon dating must be wrong. The red shift must be wrong. There was no Old Kingdom of Egypt, so most of archeology must also be wrong.

You apparently don't even know all the points of view...

The earth may well be millions of years old...It was filled with animals large and small and something akin to humans...It had land, water, sky and whatever was needed for life...

God destroyed that creation, and started over again, 6000 years ago...Thus Adam and Eve...

[Iscool]

And I could never believe that it is anything but evolution, and an intricate part of Gods plan. So we have interesting and diverse beliefs. I’m ok with that. I think where we all get in trouble us forcing our beliefs on others. But discussion is not only interesting, it is informative. This is how we learn from each other. I have no problem with your belief. I find it interesting.

What??? You just said those who don't accept your beliefs are dumber than a box of rocks...You don't respect nor accept any one else's beliefs...

[Redmen4ever]

sorry. I didn’t realize I had to make clear I referring to all the points of view on this thread. Another points of view I left out was Space Aliens.

[baltiless]

In museums and universities around the world. Educate yourself.

[vladimir998]

“Again- God would have had to keep adam and eve alive for a couple billion years or 1000 years (where the bible states 1 day = 1000 years if this is what some claim days t mean in creation)”

1) God can do whatever He wants.

2) If a “day” is something other than 24 hours, then it can be whatever duration God wants it to be.

“There’s no need for me to stay away from it because the bible is clear about what kind of death happened before fall, and it wasn’t soul death- plants which have no soul died before the fall, those with souls did not”

1) All living creatures have souls - they just don’t all have rational souls. Only human beings have rational souls.

2) There was no death of human beings before the Fall for there were only two human beings other than Adam and Eve. Belief in pre-adamite people (Preadamism) is a heresy. Don’t embrace it. The Bible tells us that Adam was the first biological man—in Genesis 1–5; Deuteronomy 32:8; 1 Chronicles 1:1; Luke 3:38; Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 15:22, 45; 1 Timothy 2:13; and Jude 1:14.

“The term the bible uses is “nephesh.” it means soul- there was no soul death before the fall”

There’s no “soul death” ever for any human being for there is judgment after death of the body. That means there is a living soul after the body dies. Death = the separation of the body from the soul. Some ignorant people mistake some Biblical references to persons (called souls) as actual literal references to souls rather than complete persons.

“Yes there is reason to think God didn’t infact keep them alive for billions of years”

There might be, but a “day’ doesn’t have to be billions of years. You keep ignoring that point.

“The top Hebrew scholars all agree that the writer of Genesis 1 intended the word day to mean 24 hours. If they all agree . . . then why can’t we?”

1) Not all “top Hebrew scholars” actually agree on that.

2) Some of the top Hebrew scholars in the world don’t believe in Christ. Should we believe them?

[rawcatslyentist]

They flat out ignore The Fact of Life.

It takes Life to make Life.

It doesn't just happen. It has to be made by another living creation, or Creator.

[rawcatslyentist]

why didn’t the unicorn get on the Ark?

It was one of the species that had been engineered by man. One of many like satyrs minotaurs, and other trans species creatures of old. That is why this world was washed.

The platypus looks to me like one of the very few that endured the flood. It looks like who ever designed it was having a laugh, or using up leftover parts. A poison duck beaver kangaroo bird. Just what kind of environment would it take to favor that kind of mutation? A lab?

[bramps]

Hmmm...

In the time you spent insulting me you could’ve simply posted some photos of these many convincing transitional photos from museums.

Yet you went with the insult.

Why?

[baltiless]

Insulting you? Really? Do you need a safe space? I did not even remotely insult you. To accuse me of such more than suggests hypersensitivity.

[Redmen4ever]

Also the giraffe. why would God put those funny horns or whatever they are on the head of the giraffe unless he had a sense of humor? The giraffe must have been another gene splicing job by pre-flood man, that nevertheless survived. Maybe because of its long neck.

The unicorn = rhinoceros. behemoth = hippo. leviathan = crocodile.

Mammoths didn’t survive the warming of the earth following the end of the last Ice Age. Early man made cave drawings that included these creatures. But early man did not make any cave drawings of dinosaurs.

Upon the end of the Ice Age, the waters of the melting glaciers gathered into huge lakes, behind ice and earthen berms that the glaciers themselves formed as they pushed south. Upon a heavy rain, these dams burst, unleashing floods. We have lots of evidence of these floods.

Dinosaurs died a long, long time ago, before the start of ice ages. But, if they lasted had until the flood, they would have been on the Ark, because God put the animals onto Ark, not Noah. The flood doesn’t explain the disappearance of the dinosaurs or the unicorn or the disappearance of any other creature.

The funny thing about the flood is this: until recently, the naysayers said there was no flood. It was a flood myth, they said. But, the flood was never a myth. It has been verified by archeology and other means. The verification of the flood substitutes that the Bible is amazingly true.

[bramps]

...still no photos
...but more insults
(get rid of the ‘ti’ and add an ‘l’)