I think you have Lucy confused with Piltdown man
Good catch Lausten 
Lucy is doing just fine, though she’s getting company from all over Africa especially southeastern Africa, Rising Star Cave system.
I just don’t find her very attractive. She’s probably a nice person, and I am being rather superficial, but I just can’t hack the beard. Plus, older women can be fine, but 300,000 yoa? That’s a bit much. I guess I could do her, if the future of humanity depended on it. But I wouldn’t like it. (At least I hope I wouldn’t like it.)
Of course Darwin’s contemporaries laughed at him. His disciples of today insist Darwin had the right idea, that instead of whales evolving into bears, instead, whales evolved into cows and hippopotamuses. Of course there is no evidence in the fossils to support this claim either, but that hasn’t stopped desperate people from believing in science fiction.As you noted, it was the 1st edition. That's how science works, it corrects its errors. That's an argument for science. I didn't look that hard because it's not my job to correct you, but hippos and whales evolved from the same 4 legged ancestor, that's different than one becoming the other. You can lookup the fossil links yourself.
Tim: I just don’t find her very attractive.How do you know it's a "she" or even a female deer? From a bone fragment? Talk about superstitions.
To me he/she looks very handsome and competent. The eyes speak of intelligent observation and her body is obviously perfecectly adapted to its environment and required physical abilities.
Never judge by today’s standards, that’s just not a equivalent lifestyle. For its day that hominid was “beautifully” adapted to its environment. If she was female I would bet the males of that day would find her extremely attractive.
Like I said, I was risking coming across as a chauvinist. But you can’t help who you find attractive. Could I just say she’s not my type for a sexually intimate relationship. A business partner, fine. A drinking buddy, okay. But I would be hard pressed to come up with some feelings of sexual excitation with that sloping forehead and the beard. I know I am superficial in that way.
LOL, well when you live in an ice-age body hair and a beard may well be a asset. Maybe not so dainty, but think how nice and warm when you snuggle up to a furball…
I never noticed this thread before. How shaky is the faith of a person who has to, in the very title of the post, assert that evolution is a “myth”? Fortunately science doesn’t care whether you believe in it or not. It’ll still make your computers and lattes for you.
Widdershins said ; Fortunately science doesn’t care whether you believe in it or not. It’ll still make your computers and lattes for you.Unfortunately it is the very argument theists use to "prove" that it takes a creator to make the computer and coffee machine which creates the lattes.
It is a convenient avoidance of having to research how things really work. “God is the watch maker, God is making it all work, God is good”, amen!
Theists speak of an Omniscient, Omnipotent god who designed the universe and mankind for his own personal pleasure, but they really have no clue of which they speak, the lack of critical knowledge among the US population is shameful, in view of our national wealth. 17th in the world? For shame!
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD);
You might be interested to know that Jehovah’s Witnesses, at least the one I’ve been talking to, don’t think that God is omniscient. They believe he has the power to be omniscient, but chooses not to know everything. It’s their way of avoiding the whole “What’s the point if it’s already pre-ordained?” thing.
I find it interesting that God has such a complicated relationship with knowledge. He doesn’t appear to like think smart very much. Adam and Steve were kicked out of the garden, not for eating a fruit, but for gaining knowledge that God didn’t want them to have. In this version of the mythology God shuns his own ability to know things. And faith demands that you ignore what you know and just believe, even though there’s no real reason to believe other than “Because I say so”.
The table above suggests that average Canadians are much more skilled at reading, math, and science than average US citizens. But it’s a 10 or 11 year old table. (I can tell because I can read and do some math, despite being from the US).
TimB, you’re not an average US citizen…
AlterEgo2 : The reality is that there is not one single transitional fossil showing how, for example, Creature A evolved into Creature D.Of course not, and that is because you pose a false evolutionary chronology.
Creature A evolved into creature B, which evolved into creature C, which evolved into creature D, which is no longer recognizable as being related to ceaure A.
You are ignoring all the missing links of the intermediate creatures B and C. How convenient.
If you are building a church you dont get from the foundation to the spire without the building blocks in between. Get it?
(I can tell because I can read and do some math, despite being from the US).Lol, I could tell it was from the UK before seeing the label above it because they use "maths" instead of "math". I'm an avid Doctor Who fan and they did a long-running bit about a maths teacher the Doctor kept referring to as a gym teacher to insult his intelligence. So, not as super smart as doing maths and reading or anything, but I still notice things!