|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total) |
| |
anil dahar | |
Total: 919,519 Year: 6,776/9,624 Month: 116/238 Week: 33/83 Day: 3/6 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Lucy (Australopithecus) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porkncheese Member (Idle past 529 days) Posts: 198 From: Australia Joined: |
From these few bones
Can we really draw this conclusion???
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4755 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread copied here from the Lucy (Australopithecus) thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2366 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Yes, experts really can draw some conclusions--its not just wild-ass-guesswork.
They study bones of all sorts of critters for years and can recognize small variations in features and give good estimates on what they are and what they mean. I studied a lot of this in grad school, so I have seen it first-hand. With Lucy, start by looking at the innominate, and compare it with both modern humans and chimps. Try perusing a few issues of American Journal of Physical Anthropology as an example of the detailed analyses that they are using now, which are far better than when I was a student.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity. Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 236 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Are you under the impression that Lucy is the only Australopithecus afarensis fossil ever found?
Well, you're wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porkncheese Member (Idle past 529 days) Posts: 198 From: Australia Joined: |
quote: No Australopithecus afarensis - The Australian Museum
quote: Presumptuous indeed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 236 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Now you're trying to change the subject.
Do you think that all our our knowledge of Australopithecus afarensis come from the fossil called Lucy alone?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1665 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
From these few bones Can we really draw this conclusion??? Argument from incredulity? Yes. We can make inferences of muscle and skin from our study of anatomy, the same way that forensic scientists reconstruct bodies to help identify victims. This is a very well developed science, particularly related to hominids. It starts with reconstruction of the skeleton, articulated the way the bones fit together. In this case we have not just Lucy, but Little Foot and the First Family and other fossils of Australopithecus africanus That gives us a composite skeleton:
The brown areas represent actual fossil elements, the white are from mirroring and extrapolating missing elements from knowledge of other fossils (the ribs and the toes and the finger tips). Which we can place between a human skeleton and a chimpanzee skeleton for comparison. Note the posture of the chimpanzee is limited by the articulation of the bones, with bent knees and bend at the waist, and bent neck pushing the head forward (the spin connects further back on the head rather than under it as in hominids).
Then the skeleton is "fleshed out" with thicknesses for muscles and skin and organs typical of apes (which includes humans).
quote: Finally the skin, hair, eyes are extrapolated from known living apes (including humans).
Can we really draw this conclusion??? Conclusion? It's a hypothetical reconstruction. For display in a museum, not for scientific study. Is the skin color and the amount of hair, eyes, etc accurate? No, nor is it claimed to be. But it is as accurate as we can currently deduct from the evidence -- the actual scientific evidence of the fossil bones. Do you understand that the science works from the bones not the reconstructions in museums? Enjoy ps See {composite\Lucy\Little-Foot\Australopithicus} was bipedal and The story of Bones and Dogs and Humans for additional discussion.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porkncheese Member (Idle past 529 days) Posts: 198 From: Australia Joined: |
Dude... Read Message 5 again. I directly answered your question with a no.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 428 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
And you didn't mention any of the other fossils, but instead mentioned the Laetoli footprints. The obvious inference is that you are not aware of the other fossils.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Porkncheese Member (Idle past 529 days) Posts: 198 From: Australia Joined: |
If you look at the link I posted on message 5 you will see that I'm well aware of all the fossils found on Australopithecus afarensis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 236 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Nope. You didn't answer the question. Do you think that everyting we know about Australopithecus afarensis came from Lucy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6077 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Posting a bare link is not a response and is against forum rules, as you've already been informed.
You also need to tell us what is at that link in your own words. Failure to do so will get you the disrespect that you earn from such misbehavior. The reason for that rule is because we have seen too many creationists link to a source that is either a creationist source (as you have already done) or else it says the opposite of what they think it does because they don't understand it (or else lifted part of it out of context in order to misquote it). As a result, we do not waste our time chasing your rabbits down your rabbit holes. Say what you intend to say and provide the link as support -- or provide a quote from that link along with the link so that we can verify the quote. But don't discredit yourself by posting a bare link. Edited by dwise1, : rabbit holes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10304 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Porkncheese writes: From these few bones
So you knew that there were more bones than this which went into the reconstruction, but you failed to mention them. Do you see the problem here? With Lucy, we have a nearly complete skeleton from the neck down, assuming that one side is a mirror image of the other side. We also have numerous A. afarensis skulls that are nearly complete and match up with the pieces from Lucy. How is this speculative?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10304 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Porkncheese writes: Presumptuous indeed That has nothing to do with the opening post. You are trying to change the subject now that you have been caught misrepresenting the evidence. Also, we find fossils of a bipedal ape from the same time period and same geographic area. What is wrong with saying that A. afarensis is the top suspect for leaving those footprints?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9012 From: Canada Joined:
|
If you look at the link I posted on message 5 you will see that I'm well aware of all the fossils found on Australopithecus afarensis If that is the case then the question:"From these few bones can we really draw this conclusion?" Doesn't make any sense. Since you knew there were many other bones.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024