Now you have my curiosity, what "qualifier or disclaimer?"
When citing "Lucy" as an example intellectual honesty would dictate that conclusions are not based solely on the Lucy example but is corroborated by other specimens, or that the information is disputed, or that many scientists content that it is not conclusive.
The problem I am alluding to has little to do with the evolution versus creation debate, and has a lot to do with teaching critical thinking and scientific skepticism. Whether history, economics, social studies, or science students in most public schools are not being taught how to think, how to construct or deconstruct an argument or hypothesis or even scientific process. As I said earlier, get your kids out of those schools or spend a significant amount of time rebutting and supplementing what is coming form the class room.