But what about Lucy? This most recent discovery in Africa is being heralded by many as a true transitional form, typically a replacement for the outmoded australopithecines. Could this be hasty judgment? Let's examine the evidence. Lucy is a partial fossil skeleton, about the size of a chimpanzee, supposedly female, discovered by paleontologist Dr. Donald Johanson on November 30, 1974, in Hadar, Ethiopia. It is more complete than most fossil finds in that about 40 percent of the bones of the body have been recovered.
The age is "estimated" to be 3.2 million years. The find includes a V-shaped jaw, part of hip and large bones, and other assorted bones with very little skull fragments.2 There were other finds at the same location, other skulls and U-shaped jawbones.
What evidence makes this creature a transitional form? According to Dr. Johanson, she walked upright! Her brain size is still small, ape-like in proportion, and most of the other features are predominantly ape-like.
2007-07-05 15:39:48 · 12 answers · asked by Dark Angel 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Some say that anatomically it is not different than a modern chimpanzee. The jaw, in particular, is distinct in that it is V-shaped, totally unlike human jaws.
And what evidence supports the idea that this creature walked upright? The angle that the upper leg bone makes with the lower leg bone at the knee. Looking head on, chimpanzee and gorilla legs have an angle of 0 degrees. Humans have an angle of about 9 degrees. If the angle is much greater it gives a "knocked kneed" condition in humans. Lucy and the australophithecines have a larger angle of about 15 degrees.3
Does this make her an upright walker? Present day orangutan and spider monkeys have the same angle as humans yet are extremely adept tree climbers. Some experts argue that the higher angle makes her a better climber.4 This appears to be a knee-jerk reaction rather than clear scientific thinking.
2007-07-05 15:42:18 · update #1
The most interesting facets are the bones were scattered all over the place, not in one single area. OK maybe animals feasted the on the dead carcus and dragged elements of it away, we still find other animal fossles and bones together in one general close area.
Lucy is a strange case.
2007-07-05 15:56:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I saw Lucy in the Pacific Science Center in Seattle just last month. I guarantee you I am as human as you and am very much alive. A number of other humans saw her at the same time. She is currently on a six year exhibition tour of the US. for any other humans who might want to see her. The first human (Homo Sapiens) who saw her was American anthropologist Donald Johanson in 1974. Johanson found not one tooth, but 47 bones, nearly 40% of a hominid who lived about 3.2 million years ago in the Afar Depression in Ethiopia. Homo Sapiens evolved about 400,000 years ago, but I doubt that any of them saw Lucy alive or dead at that time, nor did anyone go back in time. No she was not a fraud, and no there was no pig. She was an entirely new species of human ancestor, Australopithecus afarensis. They called her Lucy for the Beatles song which was apparently the favorite song of someone in the camp and was played constantly and loudly. They have since found over 360 skeletons and partial skeletons of Australopithecus afarensis, 216 of them were found at that site. We have the fossils, we win.
2016-05-19 03:21:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, it is by no means the "most recent" discovery. She was found over thirty years ago. Many more discoveries have been made since then.
Secondly, Lucy is in no way a "raplacement" for Australopithicenes, since she is one. Australopithicus afarensis, to be precise.
And yes, she is partial, about 40%. When you figure in bilateral symmetry, we have nearly 80% of the skeleton.
She was "ape-like" since 3.2 million years ago is closer to the human-chimpanzee split than it is to us. Of course, we are ape-like as well, since we are also apes. Biologically speaking, of course.
To sum up, Lucy is an excellent example of a transitional hominid.
2007-07-05 16:08:50 · answer #3 · answered by sfbcaptain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh look yet another person with NO education in the field gives his uneducated opinion.
How cute.
Honestly, do you EVER do any research before you type this stuff?
Tell you what, if you have any CREDIBLE (remember that word as it's important) evidence to "dethrone" Lucy as a hominid ancestor of Homo Sapiens then post it.
Trust me, you'll be the first person to do so. Oh sure there are plenty of crackpots out there (like the good "Dr". Ken Hovind) but REAL scientists? Not a single one will dispute the veracity that Lucy is our direct ancestor. None.
And that is a fact that, for some reason, you can't seem to be able to deal with.
2007-07-05 15:42:40 · answer #4 · answered by Yoda Green 5 · 6⤊ 4⤋
I read about Lucy in a book! I think Lucy can be used as a very solid evidence toward evolution!
2007-07-05 15:44:26 · answer #5 · answered by Love Exists? 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Where did you copy and paste that from, if I may ask? I ask this since I have read your other answers and there is no way you could have come up with this on your own.
2007-07-05 15:42:47 · answer #6 · answered by ReeRee 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Lucy is a distant relative of Whoppy Goldberg.
2007-07-05 15:47:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Hmm...cut and pasted straight from a creationists webpage. How scientific.
http://www.asu.edu/clas/iho/lucy.html#hominid
atheist
2007-07-05 15:50:13 · answer #8 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
it goes...
walk on 2 legs then the brain sizes increase and so on.
transition is gradual and occurs over time.
2007-07-05 15:45:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I am not a scientist. I would believe the garbage man before I would believe the bible.
You could choose to be educated you know. Or you could choose to remain willfully ignorant. The choice is yours.
2007-07-05 15:46:21 · answer #10 · answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋