Remarkably complete’ 3.8-million-year-old cranium of human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

[Subduction Zone]

wELL, GIVE ME THE EVIDENCE ON WHERE lUCY'S KNEE BONE WAS FOUND.
dR jOHANSON SPECIFICALLY SAID, 1.5 MILES AWAY.

No, he did not. You are using a lying source. You won't even post it here. I just posted an image of Lucy in an edit. You can see her knee. Lucy was the fourth A. afarensis found. One of the earlier finds was a kneebone, but it was not Lucy's. Lucy had her own.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One more thing, your terribly confused and dishonest source may have originally screwed the pooch by conflating the second A. afarensis find with Lucy. That was a knee bone. From the article I linked earlier:

"

• AL 129-1

Main article: AL 129-1
The first A. afarensis knee joint was discovered in November 1973 by Donald Johanson as part of a team involving Maurice Taieb, Yves Coppens, and Tim White in the Middle Awash of Ethiopia's Afar Depression."

The reason that I know your source is lying is because even if this was an honest mistake that mistake was corrected years and years ago. A mistake that is corrected becomes a lie if repeated after the correction.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@SA Huguenot , if you heard me saying "Christians believe that nailing someone to a tree makes them live forever." And then you took the time to show me that is not what the Bible says or what you believe what would you think of me if I repeated that former claim? You would probably think that I was a lying idiot. That is the case with the sources that you are using. They have not been corrected just once when they lie. They have been corrected countless times. They don't care. They would rather lie.

 

[SA Huguenot]

You have to look at all of the evidence. It was not just the knee. The hips tell an even stronger story of how she walked upright. The hips of those others cannot be bipedal.

i can tell that you have been reading lying sources. All that they can do is to fill your head with easily refuted garbage. For example, they lied to you about where Lucy's knees were found. Why do you listen to lying idiots?

This is a picture of all of the bones of Lucy, found at one site:

As you can see the knee can be reconstructed between the left femur and the right shin bones.

Why would you even think I will be so gullable to be lied to. Pal, I can read for myself. perhaps you think Creationist websites distorts the truth and you pre empt that what they say is lies.
Well, lets look at one of the first websites I found on Google. This was just a quick choice.

Lucy: A marvelous specimen | Learn Science at Scitable

Look at how your "Evolutionist" writers distorts the truth.
They dont tell you flatout that Lucy's knee bone was found a year before the real Lucy was found 1.5 Miles away, in a totally different sediment layer.
They just give this quick entrance to the essay and by the way mentions that Johanson found the knee bone in 1973, and Lucy in 1974.
Then all this explanations on how we know it is part of one carcass, because there are no double patrs such as tooth and duplicate bones.
Well, this is also a lie, there were 4 Jawbones discovered with Lucy, one V shaped (Non human) and 3 U shaped (human).
And look at the picture of Lucy's built up model. Human feet!
Guess what, totally human, modern human!
Now show me just one fraction of a bone from Lucy's foot!
So, who is the liars?
The creationists that mentions the factual discoveries not mentioned by the paleontologists, or the paleontologists that dont want you to know these details?

Now why would you place yourself and your statements en par with "Observational and experimental science", if it is clear that your evidence produced by liars are only "Theoretical science"?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

wELL, GIVE ME THE EVIDENCE ON WHERE lUCY'S KNEE BONE WAS FOUND.
dR jOHANSON SPECIFICALLY SAID, 1.5 MILES AWAY.

It wasn't Lucy's knee bone. The knee bone and Lucy were two separate discoveries:

"Dear Mr. Lippard:

Thank you for your letter of July 27th, informing me of the upcoming article by creationist Walter Brown in the Creation/Evolution Journal.

It does not surprise me that I am being misquoted because, after all, this is practically the only defense creationists have. In any court of law, such misquotation would, of course, be totally dismissed and not accepted in the consideration of any litigation.

On November 20, 1986 I did lecture at the University of Missouri at Kansas City. Since I give so many lectures all over the world, I do not remember specifically what I say at each and every lecture; however, I believe that I can clear up Mr. Brown's lack of attention to accuracy.

In November 1973, during my first major expedition to Hadar, I found a perfectly preserved knee joint (minus the kneecap) at a locality numbered A.L. 128/129. All detailed anatomical analyses and biomechanical considerations of this joint indicate that the hominid possessing it, Australopithecus afarensis, was fully capable of upright bipedal posture and gait.

In 1974, "Lucy" was found in locality A.L. 288, situated some 2-1/2 km northeast of the knee joint locality. "Lucy" preserves a proximal tibia, as well as enough of distal femur, to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery. Hence, "Lucy" was also capable of fully upright bipedal posture and gait, as her hip and ankle joints also indicate. Stratigraphically, these two discoveries are separated by nearly 70 meters.

Mr. Brown is thoroughly incorrect in saying that "Lucy"'s femur was found 2-3 km away from the rest of the skeleton. As you can see, these are two very different discoveries; the 1973 knee joint in the lower part of the stratigraphic section, and "Lucy"'s skeleton some 70 m above it."

SOURCE: Letter from Donald Johanson, August 8, 1989

 

[SA Huguenot]

@SA Huguenot , if you heard me saying "Christians believe that nailing someone to a tree makes them live forever." And then you took the time to show me that is not what the Bible says or what you believe what would you think of me if I repeated that former claim? You would probably think that I was a lying idiot. That is the case with the sources that you are using. They have not been corrected just once when they lie. They have been corrected countless times. They don't care. They would rather lie.

Pal, the article I persented was written in 2014!
Jee wizz, but you should actually go and find out what the paleontologists are saying.
Even the Knee bone in your picture is the one found 1.5 miles away, 200 feet deeper than Lucy's carcass!
Dr Johanson uttered the statement himself in 1984!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would you even think I will be so gullable to be lied to. Pal, I can read for myself. perhaps you think Creationist websites distorts the truth and you pre empt that what they say is lies.
Well, lets look at one of the first websites I found on Google. This was just a quick choice.

Lucy: A marvelous specimen | Learn Science at Scitable

Look at how your "Evolutionist" writers distorts the truth.
They dont tell you flatout that Lucy's knee bone was found a year before the real Lucy was found 1.5 Miles away, in a totally different sediment layer.
They just give this quick entrance to the essay and by the way mentions that Johanson found the knee bone in 1973, and Lucy in 1974.
Then all this explanations on how we know it is part of one carcass, because there are no double patrs such as tooth and duplicate bones.
Well, this is also a lie, there were 4 Jawbones discovered with Lucy, one V shaped (Non human) and 3 U shaped (human).
And look at the picture of Lucy's built up model. Human feet!
Guess what, totally human, modern human!
Now show me just one fraction of a bone from Lucy's foot!
So, who is the liars?
The creationists that mentions the factual discoveries not mentioned by the paleontologists, or the paleontologists that dont want you to know these details?

Now why would you place yourself and your statements en par with "Observational and experimental science", if it is clear that your evidence produced by liars are only "Theoretical science"?

No, Johanson found the knee of a different A. afarensis. That was not Lucy. One more time, Australopithecus afarensis is the species. Lucy was the fourth one found. Lucy had her own knees. The second find was a kneebone. It was not Lucy's knee.

 

[SA Huguenot]

It wasn't Lucy's knee bone. The knee bone and Lucy were two separate discoveries:

"Dear Mr. Lippard:

Thank you for your letter of July 27th, informing me of the upcoming article by creationist Walter Brown in the Creation/Evolution Journal.

It does not surprise me that I am being misquoted because, after all, this is practically the only defense creationists have. In any court of law, such misquotation would, of course, be totally dismissed and not accepted in the consideration of any litigation.

On November 20, 1986 I did lecture at the University of Missouri at Kansas City. Since I give so many lectures all over the world, I do not remember specifically what I say at each and every lecture; however, I believe that I can clear up Mr. Brown's lack of attention to accuracy.

In November 1973, during my first major expedition to Hadar, I found a perfectly preserved knee joint (minus the kneecap) at a locality numbered A.L. 128/129. All detailed anatomical analyses and biomechanical considerations of this joint indicate that the hominid possessing it, Australopithecus afarensis, was fully capable of upright bipedal posture and gait.

In 1974, "Lucy" was found in locality A.L. 288, situated some 2-1/2 km northeast of the knee joint locality. "Lucy" preserves a proximal tibia, as well as enough of distal femur, to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery. Hence, "Lucy" was also capable of fully upright bipedal posture and gait, as her hip and ankle joints also indicate. Stratigraphically, these two discoveries are separated by nearly 70 meters.

Mr. Brown is thoroughly incorrect in saying that "Lucy"'s femur was found 2-3 km away from the rest of the skeleton. As you can see, these are two very different discoveries; the 1973 knee joint in the lower part of the stratigraphic section, and "Lucy"'s skeleton some 70 m above it."

SOURCE: Letter from Donald Johanson, August 8, 1989

"to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery"
Thank you, so the knee bone you have in your picture does not exist!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Pal, the article I persented was written in 2014!
Jee wizz, but you should actually go and find out what the paleontologists are saying.
Even the Knee bone in your picture is the one found 1.5 miles away, 200 feet deeper than Lucy's carcass!
Dr Johanson uttered the statement himself in 1984!

Quote the article where it says that it was Lucy's knee.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery"
Thank you, so the knee bone you have in your picture does not exist!

LOL!! Epic fail! It was the same species. Not Lucy. Oh, that is rich!

 

[SA Huguenot]

Guys, the knee bone of Lucy was never discovered, but the paleontologists used the anatomy of the Femur, and by mathematical moddeling created a knee bone on the presumption that the one discovered will have the same measurements.
Guess what?
They discovered it can be the same!
NJow, how the hell did they determine a 15degree angle on Lucy's carcass knee bone that does not exist, and assumed it is 15 degreesw on this one also.
Do they tell you that there was other jawbones discovered?
No,
Why?
because they will have to tell you they are human, just like the footprints in lava ash which they ascribe to Lucy!
Now, Human jaws, Human Knee, Homan Footprints......
and a 40% carcass of an ape actually tells me that there were humans that might have hunted Lucy!

 

[Subduction Zone]

The photo I posted earlier were of all the bones of Lucy. She was the fourth example of an A. afarensis found. Not the first, not the second, that was the kneebone that Brown lied about, not the third, but the fourth. What made her remarkable was how many of her bones were found. That is why pictures show that. They do not include bones from before or from after that find in that picture. Why would they?

 

[SA Huguenot]

Quote the article where it says that it was Lucy's knee.

I am going home now.
Wht dont you show me Lucy's real knee, not the modeled one made up and constructed by Paleontologists who want to make money.
if you read all the conflicting statements of Johnson over a 20 year period, you will come to the conclusion that he is a pathalogical liar!

 

[SA Huguenot]

Flippit pal, I am talking of Lucy's bones, not version 2, 3, or 100.
Go look at the lies!
Do you see the continious concoctions and additions to the story?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Guys, the knee bone of Lucy was never discovered, but the paleontologists used the anatomy of the Femur, and by mathematical moddeling created a knee bone on the presumption that the one discovered will have the same measurements.
Guess what?
They discovered it can be the same!
NJow, how the hell did they determine a 15degree angle on Lucy's carcass knee bone that does not exist, and assumed it is 15 degreesw on this one also.
Do they tell you that there was other jawbones discovered?
No,
Why?
because they will have to tell you they are human, just like the footprints in lava ash which they ascribe to Lucy!
Now, Human jaws, Human Knee, Homan Footprints......
and a 40% carcass of an ape actually tells me that there were humans that might have hunted Lucy!

Wrong. The image I posted shows a knee. Johanson corrected your lying source. You cannot find any valid source that says Lucy did not have a knee.

Let's say we dig up your great great grandmother's corpse and even though most of it is gone we find a knee. Does that mean that your great great grandfather did not have a knee? If we dig up his corpse and find a knee is it fake?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am going home now.
Wht dont you show me Lucy's real knee, not the modeled one made up and constructed by Paleontologists who want to make money.
if you read all the conflicting statements of Johnson over a 20 year period, you will come to the conclusion that he is a pathalogical liar!

I posted the photo of it. You don't have any conflicting statements of Johanson. You could not quote any. All you have are the words of Brown,a creationist shown to be a lair.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Flippit pal, I am talking of Lucy's bones, not version 2, 3, or 100.
Go look at the lies!
Do you see the continious concoctions and additions to the story?

Find a valid source,that means no lying creationist sources, that show Johanson said otherwise.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

"to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery"
Thank you, so the knee bone you have in your picture does not exist!

Do you not understand that it being identical didn't mean it belonged to that same individual, right?

Also, selectively quoting is dishonest (emphasis mine):
"In 1974, "Lucy" was found in locality A.L. 288, situated some 2-1/2 km northeast of the knee joint locality. "Lucy" preserves a proximal tibia, as well as enough of distal femur, to indicate that the anatomy of this skeleton in the knee joint region was identical to that of the 1973 discovery. Hence, "Lucy" was also capable of fully upright bipedal posture and gait, as her hip and ankle joints also indicate. Stratigraphically, these two discoveries are separated by nearly 70 meters."

Mr. Brown is thoroughly incorrect in saying that "Lucy"'s femur was found 2-3 km away from the rest of the skeleton. As you can see, these are two very different discoveries; the 1973 knee joint in the lower part of the stratigraphic section, and "Lucy"'s skeleton some 70 m above it."
Letter from Donald Johanson, August 8, 1989

Stop spreading lies.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

if you read all the conflicting statements of Johnson over a 20 year period, you will come to the conclusion that he is a pathalogical liar!

I would be careful where you throw accusations of lying when you've just been caught in a blatant and demonstrable lie.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Guys, the knee bone of Lucy was never discovered, but the paleontologists used the anatomy of the Femur, and by mathematical moddeling created a knee bone on the presumption that the one discovered will have the same measurements.

Not two posts ago you were claiming that scientists said that Lucy's knee was found over a mile away. Now you're changing your story to "they made up the knee based on presumption!"

Which is it?