To help resolve this controversy, scientists looked at two complete shoulder blades from the fossil "Selam," an exceptionally well-preserved skeleton of a 3-year-old A. afarensis girl dating back 3.3 million years from Dikika, Ethiopia. The arms and shoulders can yield insights on how well they performed at climbing. (Shown here, Selam's cranium, face and mandible.) CREDIT: Image courtesy of Zeray Alemseged / Dikika Research Project
Maybe because Lucy *was* an ape.
Now, I thought that evolutionary theory was such that a trait that was beneficial would always overpower, or at least remain neutral to, those traits that were detrimental, or otherwise of negligible benefit. So, even after 3 million years, one might expect that a trait for more powerful shoulders, would be more of a survival imperative than proportionally weaker ones. In point of fact, there are many characteristics of early hominid development that would increase survivability over what the human race has inherited.
She’s got some ‘splainin’ to do!
I spent half of my life before age fifteen in trees. Maybe I’m a throwback?
Lucy is a joke, by a desperate professor, at the end of his tour and funding.
Parts found half a mile and depths apart, yet attributed to same critter, and WaLa! It’s transitional!
“Lucy”. Anyone know the circumstances of finding the bones called Lucy?
Almost nobody believes that this is anything but a monkey. I’m sorry but the partial skeleton is only a monkey and isn’t man’s early relative. That man evolved is clear, but this monkey is not proof of it. It’s simply proof that a vane old man wants glory for a spectacular find which really isn’t. The whole thing is silly.