Posted on 07/18/2007 9:31:21 AM PDT by Bladerunnuh
New jaw fossils might suggest a direct line of descent between two species of early humans, including the one to which "Lucy" belongs.
The 3.2 million-year-old Lucy, the earliest known hominid, was found in Ethiopia in 1974 by U.S. paleontologists Donald Johanson and Tom Gray.
Lucy and her kind, Australopithecus afarensis, stood upright and walked on two feet, though they might also have been agile tree-climbers.
Anthropologists have suspected an ancestor-descendant relationship between the Lucy species and a predecessor — Australopithecus anamensis — based on
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Didn’t take the creationists long to show up.
The species which Lucy belonged to? I think you call that a "monkey"....
I swear there is a "missing link found" and a "childhood obesity rises in America" story every other week.
I think the fault lies in our lightspeed calculations. There are some good studies that may hint that the speed of light may be slowing from an earlier velocity. Who is to say that near the beginning of the universe, the constants, such as free space permittivity and permeability were different than what we read today? I wasn't there, and neither were these scientists, so I think winding everything backwards using today's constants is just hysterical. Has the universe changed over the years dimensionally? How would we know?
because
My freepmail? Forget it. I didn’t mean it. Looks like I was right in the first place.
Has anyone ever done calculations to show a backwards population regression? It would seem to me that a whole lot of infdividuals would have to exist for the complex changes postulated by evolutionary speculation to have occurred. Enough time is one thing, but enough people or monkeys or latin-monikerred-to-sound-scientific whatevers would have to have existed as well. If so, where are all the bones? Where is the evidence of large numbers of creatures existing over long periods of time? I have never seen any treatment of this. It certainly is not discussed in the popular press. Seems like all they ever find is jaw bones.
ha ha- you are fickle my friend :)
My point being, I’ve never really gotten over the study where a scientist picked up some bird bones from a local airport from birds who had been sucked into jet engines, and he had them dated at several labs and got ages from 40,000 years on up. Forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical with the trillion year old teeth.
The earth isn't that old.
Going through jet engines deposits lots of carbon!
“The earth isn’t that old”
Oh, I’m saying the earth and everything in it has it age, things are young things are old, but to use imperfect equipment, manned by imperfect people and come out and say a certain object is from May 17th, 34.785 billion bc around 4:37 pm is just funny. If a range of dates and an error were given with their results, my ears would perk up and I’d respect that person and be more apt to listen to their theory.
Yes I was thinking of that too! Good point. ha
I did not know it was the soot they dated.
Well, it was a joke.
hence the ha. You are a bitter, bitter man. :)
They’ve found the missing link between primitive man and civilized man!
It’s us.
“There are some good studies that may hint that the speed of light may be slowing from an earlier velocity. “
Link, please.
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.