Joined: Jan. 2007
|Quote (Zachriel @ April 26 2007,19:14)|
|Another icon of evolution, the world famous fossil “Lucy” was found to not be in the modern human lineage at all.|
The article states that Australopithecus afarensis should “be placed as the beginning of the branch that evolved in parallel to ours.” Close cousins, in other words. Evolved.
(Not everyone agrees with the researchers' conclusions, while many cladists think that the determination of exact descent will often be problematic, especially in rapidly diverging lineages. In this view, everything is best considered as a cousin.)
|The interesting part of this is that this is extremely newsworthy but because it casts a very unflattering light on so many scientists who, uncritically it seems, placed Lucy in the modern human line of descent,...|
The lead author of the study, Yoel Rak, has collaborated with the discoverer of the fossils, Donald Johanson, many times, including on a recent Oxford University Press publication, The Skull of Australopithecus afarensis.
|you won’t find it widely reported except in the Darwin-denier blogs and websites. This strategy is common when embarrassing mistakes are found in widely accepted evolutionary dogma.|
That's why the embarrassed researchers hid it on the cover of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
No no no. Don't you see - by allowing disagreement amongst scientists and permitting debate regarding the true placement of Lucy in life on earth's history the scientists are really leaning towards ID. Yeah. That's the ticket.