Bet the Creationists with be re-thinking their faith now, eh?
2006-09-20 12:00:56 · 18 answers · asked by fatherf.lotski 5 in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
Just wanted 2b first to axe a question in this section. Don't hate me.
2006-09-20 12:24:50 · update #1
scull? what u talkin bout willis
2006-09-20 12:08:46 · answer #1 · answered by Bdazzeling 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Awesome they found such a complete skeleton. Although some wont be happy unless they found a mummified Astralopithecine family then they would say they were a group with birth defects. Lucy had been considered a great specimen as those "scattered bone fragments" argument creationists try to debunk it with actually are large fragment of an entire individual - you have skull, ribs, arms, legs - where previously having even a part of a skull was all that was found of a specimen. And Lucy wasn't the only representative of her species, and now you have this child which has the "tongue bone" as well so they can estimate the sounds they made.
2006-09-21 09:04:59 · answer #2 · answered by Sage Bluestorm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Naw. Don't 'hate' you. But you won't have helped any cause you might have by using the words and 'tone' when you write...........
''Bet the Creationists with be re-thinking their faith now, eh?''
Nothing like 'helping the cause' or 'being diplomatic' - and yours is neither of these.
Anyway, there are still those who believe the Earth is flat and that all evidence is faked. So, the 'rethinking' re 'Their Faith' is not something that necessarily is going to automatically kick in.
Regards.
Sash.
2006-09-22 00:03:31 · answer #3 · answered by sashtou 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for those who have not heard the story they have found a almost complete skeleton of a three year old early hominid like "Lucy" It appears she did walk upright and had long arms similar to an ape. Unfortunately the Creationists dont rely on thinking and so wont re-think anything. Evolution is something that has at least some evidence whereas creation or Intelligent Design needs some "magic" to fill in the gaps
2006-09-21 21:22:38 · answer #4 · answered by xpatgary 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
42
2006-09-20 20:10:10 · answer #5 · answered by ady 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah this bloke knows his stuff.
I saw this in the fantastic Natural history museum in London.
Gawis is situated near Hadar, where palaeoanthropologist Donald Johanson found the 3.2-million-year-old remains of "Lucy", the partial skeleton of a hominid belonging to the species Australopithecus afarensis, in 1974.
Stick that in your 6 days and one rest.
2006-09-20 19:15:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the creationists will believe that god put the skull there to test their faith.
2006-09-20 19:21:27 · answer #7 · answered by Hairyloon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it's potentially interesting, although I'm sick of hearing about how it's half-ape and half-human...so misleading and sensationalist. We are all ape after all!
Oh, and I don't hate you, I just pity your command of the English language.
2006-09-21 06:13:43 · answer #8 · answered by lauriekins 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lucy was bone fragments, not a whole skeleton. They basically recreated what they thought it should look like. Not exactly scientific.
2006-09-20 21:47:23 · answer #9 · answered by ringshank1980 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not likely , you dope. Ever heard of birth defects? One skull does not a monkey make.Now get back in your cage ! lol
2006-09-20 19:10:42 · answer #10 · answered by S.A.M. Gunner 7212 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What are you talking about? What skull? Your question needs more information.
2006-09-20 19:08:18 · answer #11 · answered by Demon Doll 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋