Replies

3.3-million-year-old fossilised remains of a human-like child

Darwin....calling Darwin. Is this the missing link? Nope, not a monkeyman? OK, we'll keep lookin.

15 posted on 09/20/2006 10:35:54 AM PDT by MadeInAmerica (- If ILLEGAL means Undocumented - Then Breaking and Entering means Unannounced Visit)

To: MadeInAmerica

Darwin....calling Darwin. Is this the missing link? Nope, not a monkeyman? OK, we'll keep lookin.

You tell me: ape, or human? Do you know any kids with faces like that?

33 posted on 09/20/2006 11:07:59 AM PDT by Physicist

To: MadeInAmerica

What "missing link" are you referring to?

66 posted on 09/20/2006 1:12:32 PM PDT by stands2reason (ANAGRAM for the day: Socialist twaddle == Tact is disallowed)

To: MadeInAmerica

3.3-million-year-old fossilised remains of a human-like child

Darwin....calling Darwin. Is this the missing link? Nope, not a monkeyman? OK, we'll keep lookin.

Um, the common ancestor of apes and humans (or any creature, like "Lucy" considerably closer to that branching point than modern humans) should show a mix of human and ape-like features. IOW an "apeman" of some sort, not a "monkeyman".

But, anyway, this is interesting. You seem to be saying, based on the the quote you choose, that Australopithecus afarensis shouldn't be considered an ape like human ancestor cause it's too human, or was just a human?

Are you aware that most antievolutionists dismiss all the Australopithecines as "just apes" and not human at all?

85 posted on 09/20/2006 5:01:28 PM PDT by Stultis

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794