The Artistry of 'Ardi' (was artist’s depiction of Ardi manipulated to promote evo-religion?)

ICR News ^ | October 15, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

[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...

[whattajoke]

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?

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

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.

[xcamel]

Neanderthal wore Gucci and Cro-magnon wore Polo.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[goodusername]

“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’.)

[GodGunsGuts]

==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!!!

[JimSEA]

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.

[count-your-change]

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.

[xcamel]

Be sure it’s a tufted one.

[count-your-change]

“
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/ -

[GodGunsGuts]

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

Finally, an honest evo ;op

[GodGunsGuts]

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

[GodGunsGuts]

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

[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)

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

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.

[Wacka]

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.

[JimSEA]

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.

[jimt]

...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 !

[count-your-change]

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!!

[jimt]

...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...