Laetoli footprints

I recently came across a local creationist which said that the Laetoli footprints is a strong proof that humans (Homo sapiens) didn't evolve from australopiths and erectus. I am curious about this. Are the footprints actually look as if they were made by modern humans?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
I recently came across a local creationist which said that the Laetoli footprints is a strong proof that humans (Homo sapiens) didn't evolve from australopiths and erectus. I am curious about this. Are the footprints actually look as if they were made by modern humans?

---

I don't know what that creationists was smoking, but I had a look and they don't look like HS feet to me.

Andya,As near as I can tell, the entire creationist-spawned "controversy" over the Laetoli prints derives from Russell Tuttle's initial and oft-repeated opinion that the prints were an early Homo (not HS). However, none of the other paleontologists/anthropologists who've examined either the original prints in sitio or their casts think that they weren't Australopithicus and most likely A. afarensis. There are two good reasons (and probably more):1. All the other bones, teeth and bone fragments found at Laetoli are A. afarensis. There is no other evidence that any other hominid was around the site.2. Computer assisted re-sizing of Lucy's foot shows an exact match with the ratios and structure of the Laetoli prints.As usual, it sounds like the creationists are stretching one person's opinion to create spurious controversy.It's not conclusive, but I'd say it was fairly compelling.

Anyway, I wondered myself. What does australopith feet look like? If it is exactly the same with H. sapiens feet, then the footprints offer no resolution.To Nos: I think the creationist guy I mention was not smoking anything, but his reputation is damaging. He is the Head of Biology Dept. of the Bandung Institute of Technology (a respected university in Indonesia) and his quoted comments were part of a speech in which he said that he would include creationism in the high school curriculum.To Quetzal: Any sources I can check for myself (especially the computer resizing)? Not that I don't trust you, but my skepticism forbids me to take your words for granted

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:To Nos: I think the creationist guy I mention was not smoking anything, but his reputation is damaging. He is the Head of Biology Dept. of the Bandung Institute of Technology (a respected university in Indonesia) and his quoted comments were part of a speech in which he said that he would include creationism in the high school curriculum.He'll do more real harm to the children then any real good. Is science in such bad shape there to allow pseudo-science to be taught as legimate science? What, does he have tenure and can't be fired? Are there no peer reviewed journals which can expose such nonsense?[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-12-2002]

What is pseudo science?

Weeell, here are two references on Leakey's original finds:Leakey, M.D., R.L. Hay, G.H. Curtis, R.E. Drake, M.K. Jakes, and T.D. White. 1976. "Fossil hominids from the Laetoli Beds, Tanzania." Nature, 262, pp. 460-465.Leakey, M.D., and R.L. Hay. 1979. "Pliocene footprints in the Laetoli Beds, northern Tanzania." Nature 278, pp. 317-328.Another good discussion available on-line is in this article. Although the overall article is not related to your question, there is a section discussing the Laetoli prints by one of the people who actually investigated them - the results obviously contradict the creationist claim.The computer bit is something that was referred to in passing in another article. I'll see if I can dig up an original source. Otherwise, my best suggestion would be to check back issues of "The Journal of Human Evolution". This is where a lot of the discussion on A. afarensis etc has been taking place for the last decade or so.[edited to fix link - Twice!][This message has been edited by Quetzal, 10-12-2002][This message has been edited by Quetzal, 10-14-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Delshad:
What is pseudo science?

---

The difference between legimate science and pesudo-science is that in science when the evidence doesn't support the theory the theory is tossed out and a new theory is started from the new evidence.In pseudo-science when the evidence doesn't support the theory the evidence is tossed out and the theory is kept because belief and faith are far more important than actual proof. I.E. Crop circles. It has been shown beyond a reasonable doubt that they are man made yet there are many who still believe that they are alien made.Creationism is nothing more than religiously inspired pseudo-science.[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-12-2002]

To Nos:
Science in Indonesia? I'm ashamed of it. It's in a really bad shape. The man I mentioned obtained a PhD (Plant Ecology...or was it Plant Biochemistry) from Swansea, UK, and he's a member of one fundamentalist religious party here. He edited the local translation of Harun Yahya's 'Evolution Deceit' (an equivalent of ICR's 'Scientific Creationism' for Muslim creationists).I am planning to expose his fault, maybe in a newspaper article. His speech were also published in a short newspaper article.To Quetzal:
Unfortunately I don't think that the titles you referred is available to my access. Can I get those off the 'Net? [preferably free]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Delshad:
What is pseudo science?

---

Delshad, here is a very good essay on pseudoscience and how to detect it:pseudoscience - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.comIn general, the site that the above link comes from is a great source of skeptical, science- and logic-based information on all kinds of nonsense which passes as true among the gullible and uneducated these days. I highly reccomend it.In fact, I reccomend that you read it's entry on Creationism:creationism and creation science - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
To Nos:
Science in Indonesia? I'm ashamed of it. It's in a really bad shape. The man I mentioned obtained a PhD (Plant Ecology...or was it Plant Biochemistry) from Swansea, UK, and he's a member of one fundamentalist religious party here. He edited the local translation of Harun Yahya's 'Evolution Deceit' (an equivalent of ICR's 'Scientific Creationism' for Muslim creationists).

​

I am planning to expose his fault, maybe in a newspaper article. His speech were also published in a short newspaper article.

​

---

I hope that you totally humiliate him and show him for the fraud he is.

That is why I need some backup! I really need to know the good reason why the Laetoli footprints weren't made by Homo sapiens.And yes, I'd be glad to publicly humiliate a creationist with a tenure

bumpanyone can help me?

Andya, I'm truly sorry. I DID look around on-line for a bit, but didn't really find anything beyond what I already gave you. Regrets I couldn't be of more help.

The newer topic, "Laetoli footprints and modern design" has been recently started. As it seems to be progressing better than this topic did, I will close this topic.Of course, it does get a bump in the process.Adminnemooseus------------------
Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads