"Lucy"

  • 31 Replies
  • 9185 Views
"Lucy"
« on: July 05, 2006, 12:14:53 AM »
A couple of weeks ago, I visited the Ethiopian National Museum in Addis Ababa where the evolutionists' prize find 'Lucy' is located on the ground floor.

  What a crock.

  The bones of a small girl.  Actually only part of the bones, but even their reconstruction in the adjacent case is plainly human.  So what else is new? The bones of that human child is the evolutionist ace card?  I was expecting something more from all the hoopla she receives.  She is definitely human.  The thought never would have entered my mind that she was anything otherwise unless I was deliberately looking for some kind of way to denounce the Bible.

  Even so, I could have done better than that.  Come on.

  The bones they have are much less than half the skeleton, and they claim that it is the most extensive find of such allegedly ancient men.  No wonder Seraphim Rose wrote decades ago that all the bones of allegedly early man worldwide supporting the evoltionist could easily fit into a single coffin if they were brought together.

  For a refreshing and more enlightened book on the subject, try 'Bones of Contention' by Marvin Lubenow:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_lubenow.html

- Dionysios

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2006, 12:18:27 AM »
Please excuse my ignorance (seriously!) but haven't "fossils" of man throughout the various stages of evolution already been found? :?

I seriously speak with litle to no knowledge on the subject :(

"Lucy"
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2006, 12:24:39 AM »
Quote from: "Rick_James"
Please excuse my ignorance (seriously!) but haven't "fossils" of man throughout the various stages of evolution already been found? :?

I seriously speak with litle to no knowledge on the subject :(


  You don't have to buy the book I recommended.  Just read the review of it I posted after clicking on the link I provided above (and have provided again below) and you will go further towards remediating that deficiency than most people ever do:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_lubenow.html

- Dionysios

"Lucy"
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2006, 04:17:39 AM »
Creation Science = Oxymoron.

"Lucy"
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2006, 04:23:46 AM »
well  you could probably take all the bones from an average sized cemetary and cram them into a single coffin if you truely were that morbid.


And to say that they were going out of there way to denounce the bible is simple undermining there life. They are scientists who are wanting to understand more about where we came from, and 90% of the diggers on that site probably couldn't give a damn about a literal following of the bible and its "oh lets add up everyones age and we will get the exact age of the Earth.... plus 6 days" thought process.



Anyway if your wanting to disprove that the earth is older than 10 thousand years there are easier ways to go about it than pointing at lucy.

"Lucy"
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2006, 05:06:50 AM »
creation science is so easily bashed to pieces by modern science in all kinds of fields. Not only does it try to challenge archeology and palentology, it challenges physics and cosmology. And it loses around every turn because it fails to change it's theory. Meanwhile evolution has been tweaked and changed since it's inception. Responding to new findings and evidence. It still remains the universially accepted best theory of how we got here scientifically.

Creationism starts with a conclusion, and tries to find evidence to prove it. Then tries to somehow nullify all evidence or arguements against it. Without stopping to think, "Gee, maybe Genesis really was written by a person and is a story, not the actual and literal word of god."


?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
"Lucy"
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2006, 10:56:01 AM »
Quote from: "Dionysios"
You don't have to buy the book I recommended.  Just read the review of it I posted after clicking on the link I provided above (and have provided again below) and you will go further towards remediating that deficiency than most people ever do:


Um, Dionysios, did you read this review?  It's actually quite damning of the book and its author:

Quote from: "Review: Bones of Contention"
Lubenow continually resorts to the argument that overlaps between species falsify human evolution. Once it is realized that this argument is based on a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, Lubenow's book loses much of its force.
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

"Lucy"
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2006, 11:06:26 AM »
Quote from: "Erasmus"
Quote from: "Dionysios"
You don't have to buy the book I recommended.  Just read the review of it I posted after clicking on the link I provided above (and have provided again below) and you will go further towards remediating that deficiency than most people ever do:


Um, Dionysios, did you read this review?  It's actually quite damning of the book and its author:

Quote from: "Review: Bones of Contention"
Lubenow continually resorts to the argument that overlaps between species falsify human evolution. Once it is realized that this argument is based on a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, Lubenow's book loses much of its force.



I noticed this too. that's what he get's for googling and then not reading the results he got.

"Lucy"
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2006, 11:21:18 AM »
Quote from: "Dionysios"
Quote from: "Rick_James"
Please excuse my ignorance (seriously!) but haven't "fossils" of man throughout the various stages of evolution already been found? :?

I seriously speak with litle to no knowledge on the subject :(


  You don't have to buy the book I recommended.  Just read the review of it I posted after clicking on the link I provided above (and have provided again below) and you will go further towards remediating that deficiency than most people ever do:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_lubenow.html

- Dionysios


  I merely aimed to provide him an informed idea of the situation.  I had stated some of the case from my side, and the review gave the opposition's viewpoint.  I would think you would appreciate the fact I had provided a link to the opposition's point of view, especially as it seems to concur with your own.

  As to Dr_Quak's comments, I would say that Lucy has to do with biology rather than geology.

  Also, it is not my aim to disprove that the earth is older than 10,000 years.  I know for a fact that the earth is exactly 7514 years old because that is what the Bible says.  You apparently do not believe that, and I believe throwing a barrage of facts out is useless as you are already convinced.  So we can at least agree to disagree.

  Anyway, the reason I posted on Lucy is because I happened to be in the vicinity of the museum where the skeleton is housed and took advantage of the opportunity to see it.  And I saw the skeleton with my own eyes.  This was about a week ago.  The opening post is a summary of my impression of it.

  As to diggers at the site where the skeleton was found, I would think the motives of the leader of the dig are more important than the personal beliefs of paid workers.  However, the impression I got of great antiquity was from what I have read in many publications.  I was unimpressed to say the least with the specimen, and the viewing of it further confirmed my conviction that the antique date ascribed to it in such publications is baseless.

  I find it worthy of reflection that all the irate posts above only smear creation science generally in an effort to give it a bad name, and none of them have anything specific to say about the topic of this post.

- Dionysios

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2006, 07:54:10 PM »
It sounds like an interesting exhibition - i hope it comes out to australia one day so I can check it out.
I was disappointed I didnt get to the Chinese Human body exhibition that recently came - the one with full bodies donated for sccientific purposes?
Apparently there was one guy chopped up into 10cm slices and then spaced apart so you could check it all out.
would have been a bit weird i think, but definetly interesting! :wink:

"Lucy"
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2006, 05:56:07 PM »
troubadour, do you have another cartoon, because you already posted this one?

Here is how scientific method should work:

FACT: pictures of dinosaurs with humans were found on walls of Grand Canyon obviously drawn by humans.
CONCLUSION: humans and dinosaurs lived together at the same time.
CONSEQUENCE: Any theory that states that dinosaurs and humans lived in different times is false and must be thrown out.


And here is how your "scientific method" actually works:

FACT: pictures of dinosaurs with humans were found on walls of Grand Canyon obviously drawn by humans.
CONCLUSION: humans and dinosaurs lived together at the same time.
CONSEQUENCE: Absolutely nothing changes in evolution theory, try to forget about the facts that don't fit your theory as soon as possible.

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2006, 06:29:01 PM »
Now google, I support your side here, so don't get me wrong, but what if the pictures were misinterpreted, or what if the human drew the pictures based on finding skeletons themselves?
(again, on your side)

?

6strings

  • The Elder Ones
  • 689
"Lucy"
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2006, 06:29:33 PM »
Alright, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say you had your conclusion in mind before you took all the facts into consideration (the very same thing you're condemning troubadour for, btw).  Because this:
Quote
FACT: pictures of dinosaurs with humans were found on walls of Grand Canyon obviously drawn by humans.

does not logically necessitate this:
Quote
CONCLUSION: humans and dinosaurs lived together at the same time.

What you can conclude from your fact is that humans drew dinosaurs on cave walls.  See, I could draw a fluffy unicorn on my house's wall, but this does not mean I lived with a unicorn.

Maybe the people who drew the pictures just found dino fossils and figured they'd have an "artist's conception" of what these things looked like?

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #13 on: July 06, 2006, 06:32:17 PM »
Jinx :D

"Lucy"
« Reply #14 on: July 06, 2006, 06:33:52 PM »
6strings, read the FACT again, this time slower and more careful. Dinos with humans.

It is not the only place where pictures were found, pictures of similar dinos were found all over the place. Now you are going say that people who drew them think the same and have the same imagination.
And I don't thing people of that time had such extensive knowledge of anatomy to draw an animal by looking at fragments of a skeleton


Also there were findings of tracks of a humans and dinos found together somewhere in Central America.

"Lucy"
« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2006, 06:36:48 PM »
Quote from: "Rick_James"
Now google, I support your side here, so don't get me wrong, but what if the pictures were misinterpreted, or what if the human drew the pictures based on finding skeletons themselves?
(again, on your side)


Why would they hunt skeletons with spears?

What you are doing is exactly what you are accusing creationists in, trying to fit the fact to your theory

?

6strings

  • The Elder Ones
  • 689
"Lucy"
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2006, 06:47:03 PM »
Quote
6strings, read the FACT again, this time slower and more careful.

Fine. I draw myself with the fluffy unicorn.  Happy?  Do I now live with the unicorn?  Hell, I'll draw myself hunting the cute little thing too, if you want, although I predict a distinct absence of this unicorn's existance.

Quote
What you are doing is exactly what you are accusing creationists in, trying to fit the fact to your theory

No, please note that anythig beyond the actual pictures is speculation, and as such, a mere theory, so we are trying to fix our theory to fit the facts...hmm...like real science does...

Quote
Why would they hunt skeletons with spears?

Did you ever look at picture books as a child, googlesearch?  Now say you didn't have paper, but hey, look! A wall!  And some coal!  Woah!  Now we're talking!  Let's tell a story about these awesome bones we found.  Hey, imagine what that animal looked like.  Dude, we could so take it out.  With what?  I dunno...spears?  Hey, awesome, let's draw that.

See where I'm going with this?
Quote

It is not the only place where pictures were found, pictures of similar dinos were found all over the place. Now you are going say that people who drew them think the same and have the same imagination.

I give you Carl Jung's theory of a universal subconscious.

Quote
And I don't thing people of that time had such extensive knowledge of anatomy to draw an animal by looking at fragments of a skeleton

Given that you are not a qualified expert, I don't care what you think.  Although, I'm reasonably sure that people who kill lots of animals for their food would evntually clue in to a whole lot of the "extensive" aspects of anatomy.  Of course, I'm also not an expert, so let's call it squre, of course, I have a reason backing up what I say, wherreas you merely have a claim...

Quote
Also there were findings of tracks of a humans and dinos found together somewhere in Central America.

Evidence please?
Show this to me and I will gladly either attempt to provide an explanation for such, or happily concede that people once lived among dinosaurs.

"Lucy"
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2006, 07:01:03 PM »
First of all using drawings is hardly a reliable data source, secondly dinosaurs kicking about on the earth hardly violates evolutionary theorem, Sharks aftar all have barely evolved since around the time dino's dissappeared.


and dionysios i also beleive in the bible, however, Jesus himself taught in parables - is it not possible that god also did the same.


also what do most people in the world today understand about general relativity, Fusion, Super Novae, and Galaxy formation? Now consider that Moses lived many thousands of years ago, even if god were able to explain to Moses about all these things (and being god that would be possible) how could he expect Moses to explain this to the people of the time? nevermind going into such detail would have obscured the end message which was, effectively, the Ten Commandments.


Nevermind the fact that, although god is perfect, man is not. And the bible was not written by god (although it was surely dictated by him) it was written by man. And then transloated by man. and then burnt and rewritten by men to suit there general political views. Due to the many translations and editorials that the bible has received it is as reliable a history source as the verbal histories that are found through out polynesian tribes (from plynesia to Hawaii to the Native Americans, they remain similar, but with the tell tale signs of Chinese whispers).


Having faith in the bible and its message is one thing (and in my opinion a good thing, fath makes a very good moral compass, and can console many when times are stressful) taking it all completely literally is another. The message is what is important not the words that convey it.

"Lucy"
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2006, 07:05:19 PM »
So, you just dismissed pictures of dinos with humans based on your interpritation of those pictures. Did it ever occured to you that a picture of a humans killing a dino for food means HUMANS KILLING A DINO FOR FOOD?

But, of course, you don't see that because your theory sais it cannot be.

?

6strings

  • The Elder Ones
  • 689
"Lucy"
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2006, 07:10:25 PM »
Quote
So, you just dismissed pictures of dinos with humans based on your interpritation of those pictures. Did it ever occured to you that a picture of a humans killing a dino for food means HUMANS KILLING A DINO FOR FOOD?

Yup, and Picasso's pictures of weird screwed up peoples' faces means that he was meeting a lot of people with messed up faces.

Quote
But, of course, you don't see that because your theory sais it cannot be.

Well, yes...see, my theory is still perfectly valid because nothing contradicts it.  So, your claim is tantamount to my saying "you just refuse to accept that an invisible giant is holding you to the earth because your ludicrous theory of gravity says that earth's mass keeps you down.  Ignorant savage."

"Lucy"
« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2006, 07:20:20 PM »
Quote from: "6strings"
Quote
So, you just dismissed pictures of dinos with humans based on your interpritation of those pictures. Did it ever occured to you that a picture of a humans killing a dino for food means HUMANS KILLING A DINO FOR FOOD?

Yup, and Picasso's pictures of weird screwed up peoples' faces means that he was meeting a lot of people with messed up faces.


 :lol:

"Lucy"
« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2006, 07:30:18 PM »
Never seen a rock wall painting for a Dinosaur to be perfectly honest. got any linky to a picture of them?



And if you found the bones of a big giant lizzard on the ground, surely your going to think "imagine the guy that killed that" and then " caw i bet there was a great bit of steak that you got out of that bugger", and when your back at your cave, doodling away  on your wall, you will probably think of what it would have been like to kill this dinosaur and eat it.


The pyramids are full of depictations of Anubis and the other gods, and the rights performed in the Afterworld, but i'm fairly sure none of the artists had every been dead and returned.


Theere are many paintings of the Reckoning, and Heaven and Angels.


There are works of arts of Medussa being slain, of Cyclops, etc.

Then of course there is sceince fiction. I'm Fairly sure that Gene Roddenberry had never traveleed to a far away planet on a space ship, but yet he made up a perfectly beleivable one for Kirk to go have sex with aliens on.


I'd also wager that George Lucas had never seen a Lightsaber.


Is it no possible that these rock drawings were simply a story telling of a great ancestor who once defeated the giant lizard that we what found the other day in the sand? and perhaps isn't this a more logical reason than somehow dinosaurs survived to this day, but yet there is no hard proof of them still existing, there are very few traces of them after about 65 million years ago, but yet they are still kciking it up with Saint George...

"Lucy"
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2006, 07:31:59 PM »
also can you please tell me how Dinosaurs existing to this day in anyway defies Evolution?

or is that not the theory you were talking about?

?

6strings

  • The Elder Ones
  • 689
"Lucy"
« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2006, 07:34:08 PM »
Heh...Dinosaurs kicking it with Saint George...It's Dino Time!
I can see Nessie being a dinosaur, and other dinosaurs surviving in bodies of water, because they're a fairly stable ecosystem...but I find it hard to believe any land dinos could have survived...except maybe in deserts or in mountainous regions...no swamps or jungles though, the environment is way too unstable, and wouldn't have been able to survive whatever killed the dinos.

"Lucy"
« Reply #24 on: July 06, 2006, 07:36:56 PM »
i wish there were some dinosaurs still around.... could you imagine seeing once of the massive full grown Sauropauds, and, even though i'd probably shit my pants, can you imagine seeing a T-Rew.


alhtough i think i just found the conspircay.... if people found out there were dinosaurs, you think anyone would want to see stupid little cat with big ass claws? hell no, you'd want to see the Tyranasaurus or the Triceretops. Zoo's would go bankrupt overnight. Yes thats right. the great Zoo syndicate is conspiring to keep the continuing existance of Dinosaurs under wraps.

"Lucy"
« Reply #25 on: July 06, 2006, 07:38:44 PM »
hmm coming to think about it.... shouldn't all these posts be over in the serpents and dragons string and not talking about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds?

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2006, 07:39:56 PM »
My point is not that humans didnt exist with dinosaurs, or that they didnt draw those paintings from real life experiences...

The point I'm (we're?) trying to make is that just because there are painitngs of them, doesn't mean they were around at the same time - as 6strings put it - picasso didnt meet a lot of weird looking people, and before that a lot of people coloured blue.

Personally I believe in Dinosaurs, evolution and not the Bible (kid's) stories - but I find it hard to judge and then believe things on assumption.

"Lucy"
« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2006, 07:45:10 PM »
calling the bible kid's stories is extremly disrespectful and stupid.


Not only is it a basis of faith for over a billion people world wide, but it is also something that comforts a great many. If it weren't for Faith there would be a lot less charity in the world, and most of the great discoveries made over the last couple of centuries would not have been made. Einstien himself stated that he studied sceince as a way to get closer to god.


by dismissing something as powerful as the bible really shows how infinitile you yourself are.

?

6strings

  • The Elder Ones
  • 689
"Lucy"
« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2006, 07:45:36 PM »
Quote
hmm coming to think about it.... shouldn't all these posts be over in the serpents and dragons string and not talking about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds?

Good point, kinda got sidetracked there...
If a mod could just splice this thread into the dino/dragon thread at googlesearch's "fact-conclusion" post...

Quote
picasso didnt meet a lot of weird looking people, and before that a lot of people coloured blue.

Hehe...I forgot about the whole blue period...

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
"Lucy"
« Reply #29 on: July 06, 2006, 07:51:36 PM »
I apologise :oops: , I did not mean it as a comment to offend but more to summarise my views on the matter. Sorry, I should have thought that line through a little more.

I think the Bible teaches some fantastic values and morals that everyone should live their life by - I just don't agree with the approach they use to convey their message ie. a constant fear of retribution from some almighty power.