Creationist Group 'Answers in Genesis' Disputes 'Lucy' Ancestry Claim

PJ Media ^ | 11/27/2015 | BY MICHAEL T. HAMILTON

[SeekAndFind]

Earlier this week Google's logo mutated (if you will) from its usual form into a Google Doodle adorned with a series of images depicting an ape evolving into a human. Clicking the Doodle led to information about "AL 288-1," less esoterically known as "Lucy the Australopithecus," or simply "Lucy." Many scientists regard the fossil as an intermediary link between apes and humans.

The same day, Googling "lucy australopithecus controversy" turned up a different interpretation of the fossil, including several from Answers in Genesis. The apologetics ministry, which focuses primarily on whether evolution or biblical creation provides the most accurate interpretation of the universe's origins, featured several articles Answers in Genesis staff has written about Lucy. The abstract of a 2012 article titled "A Look at Lucy's Legacy," by Dr. David Menton and Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, read:

Perhaps more than any other fossil, Lucy is presented as "exhibit A" for evolutionists in their attempt to show that humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor. With the recent opening of the Lucy exhibit in the Creation Museum, Answers in Genesis felt it was appropriate to present the "Lucy story" to our web visitors as well. This article will explore the origins of the fossils and interpretations by evolutionists that have led to overtly human-like representations of Lucy, such as at the Field Museum in Chicago, that differ so greatly from the equally valid representation at the Creation museum.

The authors went on to dispute claims as to Lucy's bipedality based on pelvic structure, the famous Laetoli footprints, and other points.

The site also featured a recent blog post by Ken Ham, the Answers in Genesis founder who debated Bill Nye ("The Science Guy") at the Creation Museum in Kentucky in 2014. Ham's article opened:

According to evolutionists, Lucy walked on two legs, and the group she represents is a distant ancestor of humanity (though how closely related is disputed even in their camp). US President Barack Obama even recently "met" Lucy and commented, almost reverently, on how she shows how all mankind is related to one another.

Ham's post included photographs of a Creation Museum exhibit demonstrating how covering Lucy's bones with different combinations of hair and skin drastically influences whether she resembles a human or an ape.

[ThePatriotsFlag]

Any God could make creation...all of them did for years...think about it. But the God I believe in us beyond our basic understandings of intellect. When you look at evolution and the incredible intracancies of it, only a real God could make this happen. The problem with fundamentalism is in the interpretation......and on the third day...so a fundamentalist gets out his Timex 24 hour clock and tries to figure out how God did all that just in the third day. But when making this happen, did God have a clock and Timex himself? The people writing how creation happened in Genesis were writing to people as dumb as a box of rocks...so they used days instead of trying to explain eons an million year time sections. (Unfortunately, There are still some around as dumb as a box of rocks). Evolution cannot be fully accounted for in my mind without a limitless intellect behind it. The tool God used to create the world...was evolution. I’m a “creationist” using a different clock.

[Fungi]

Uh, no. Not a very well thought through argument.

[bramps]

So where are the millions of transitional fossils?

[Theo]

Did death preceed sin?

Was Adam created with the appearance of age?

[CMB_polarization]

There are hardly any fossils at all of any kind of prehistoric man

[vladimir998]

“The people writing how creation happened in Genesis were writing to people as dumb as a box of rocks...so they used days instead of trying to explain eons an million year time sections.”

I can understand the idea that “day” does not mean exact 24 hour periods or even that it was used to convey billions of years, but the idea it was used because the Israelites were “people as dumb as a box of rocks” makes no sense. Think about it. After “In the beginning” was ANY time reference even needed? It would only be needed for some great purpose, and that great purpose could not be that the Israelites were “people as dumb as a box of rocks”.

[rawcatslyentist]

At least you don't buy the fairy tale of life springing from non living matter. That is delusional.

I can understand God's timex, as space/time is relative.

Create on one day, stretch out space time, create on the next day, stretch out space time.... To The Creator it was just a days work from his perspective. To the matter in the space time continuum it could have been trillions.

[Former Fetus]

1) as a PhD in Biology I resent being described as "dumb as a box of rocks" because I do not believe in evolution.

2) in multiple places in the Old Testament, the period including an evening and a morning is equivalent to 24 hours. Why should Gen. 1 be different?

3) The author apparently believes only what he can understand. Fair enough, but that makes his "god" very punny indeed.

[Secret Agent Man]

Layers mean nothing other than something is clearly above or below something else. Rapid hydrological sorting can cause layers as evolutionists point to as millions of years, in a matter of hours. Everyone forgets the pyroclastic flows from Mt St Helens and the exact same sort patterns being laid down over days rather than millions of years. We have the before and after evidence and can verify the way it occurred and see the results and they are identical to what is seen in the layering of the desert southwest for example. That evos claim took millions of years. That nobody saw.

Gven right temperature and pressure conditions petrified wood can be made in hours.

Flawed starting assumptions generate fatally flawed conclusions derived from the same evidence.

[Secret Agent Man]

Liguistics say the word form of “day” in Genesis is the same form of day used in the other places where day is a 24 hour day. Further, the form they dsscribe the day in, ie the first day, the second day,etc is done every day of creation week, which was also a confirmation done in other places to denote they were talkng about a literal 24 hour day.

[Redmen4ever]

Let me summarize all the points of view:

Evolutionists - Lucy or something MUST be an ancestor of mankind. Unfortunately, the earliest fossil records of homo sapiens are genetically the same as us; and genetically distinct from the fossil records of any of the now extinct bipedal hominids that we have. Perhaps we only have a few scattered fossils, some of which are bipedal hominids that went extinct.

Young earth creationists - Lucy, the dinosaurs, and all other forms of life now extinct must have been alive at the time of the flood. Carbon dating must be wrong. The red shift must be wrong. There was no Old Kingdom of Egypt, so most of archeology must also be wrong.

BOTH of these theories are based mostly on doctrinaire belief and the rejection of the best evidence before us.

Old earth creationists - the Hebrew word translated as “day” must mean a long but definite period of time. And, when Genesis says “the evening and the morning,” it means only to say that these periods of time started and then ended. The biggest problem in this point of view is why didn’t we understand the Genesis account this way prior to modern science and archeology.

[Nationale7]

Sad to see that your wise thinking is not popular here. However I don’t hold with the “dumb as a box of rocks” part of your reasoning. I think of Genesis rather as having been written down by inspired poets thinking metaphorically rather than by pedants thinking literally.

[Popman]

So where are the millions of transitional fossils?

God is hiding them as a joke to frustrate the evolutionist.../S

[ThePatriotsFlag]

Uh, no. Not a very well thought through argument.

-------

Yeah, but it works for me so it is perfect.

[Popman]

The people writing how creation happened in Genesis were writing to people as dumb as a box of rocks...so they used days instead of trying to explain eons an million year time sections.

LOL...you seriously can't actually believe that...

[ThePatriotsFlag]

Smiling at the “box of rock” objections. No humor here either :-).

[ThePatriotsFlag]

LOL Seriously you don't believe that...

---

Seriously I do...go back in time and ask a traveler there what an iPad is...you'll get my drift better. How would you explain an iPad to one with no concept. You could explain it as a tablet made from God's own magic stone that could talk, listen and paint. But of course, like the philosopher said, then people would probably worship the rock. Scary how well that analogy works today. (How much time kneeling in prayer, how much time hovering over an iPad?)

[bramps]

There are hardly any fossils at all of any kind of prehistoric man
‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
Doesn't have to be man. Show me one fossil of any species transitioning into another.
Evolutionists like to say dinosaurs turned into birds.
How about a cross between a T-Rex and a Finch?

[lavaroise]

This argument of Creationist vs. Evolutionist is pointless. Both are wrong.

Evolution is a material “manufacturing” recipe for “life”. It is not history.

The Bible is moral truth seeking and thus historical inheritence related, and not a recipe.