🚀 go-pugleaf

Daniel Packman wrote:
> In article <LEfQd.1930707$B07.292002@news.easynews.com>,
> Sam Bam  <sam@bam.slam> wrote:
> 
>>Daniel Packman wrote:
>>
>>>In article <SI5Qd.2155637$f47.378244@news.easynews.com>,
>>>Sam Bam  <sam@bam.slam> wrote:
>>>.......
> 
>  
> 
>>>>What about Lucy? Just another partial find of some primate, put
>>>>together to look like a human ancestor? Could the wide
>>>>separation of Lucy's bones (200 feet by 1 mile) better point
>>>>
>>>>>to a catastrophic scenario - such as a world wide flood?
> 
> 
>>>One does not generalize the findings at a single site
>>>into a world-wide flood without more evidence.
> 
> 
>>Yet one narrows the widely scattered remains into a cohesive unit?
> 
> 
> Actually, as others have pointed out, Lucy's bones were
> not separated at all
> 
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint/johanson1.html

Lippard is a widley known uselessnet crank, and any letters to him are 
suspect fromt he get go.

http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0714_Lucy_fails_test.html

But hold on, the story gets better. Dr. Johanson gave a lecture at the 
University of Missouri in Kansas City, Nov. 20, 1986, on Lucy and why he 
thinks she is our ancestor. It included the ideas already mentioned and 
that Lucy's femur and pelvis were more robust than most chimps and 
therefore, "could have" walked upright. After the lecture he opened the 
meeting for questions. The audience of approximately 800 was quiet so 
some creationists asked questions. Roy Holt asked; "How far away from 
Lucy did you find the knee?" (The knee bones were actually discovered 
about a year earlier than the rest of Lucy). Dr. Johanson answered 
(reluctantly) about 200 feet lower (!) and two to three kilometers away 
(about 1.5 miles!). Continuing, Holt asked, "Then why are you sure it 
belonged to Lucy?" Dr. Johanson: "Anatomical similarity." (Bears and 
dogs have anatomical similarities).

http://www.csinfo.org/lucy_isn.htm

According to Richard Leakey, who along with Johanson is probably the 
best-known fossil-anthropologist in the world, Lucy's skull is so 
incomplete that most of it is "imagination made of plaster of paris".1 
Leakey even said in 1983 that no firm conclusion could be drawn about 
what species Lucy belonged to.