I fully understand the argument as to why they re-reconstructed it. I just think it lacks credibility: During the fossilization process, the pelvic bone distorted. This distortion just happened to make it look like a normal chimp pelvic bone. It looked so much like a normal ape pelvic that the World renowned paleoanthropologist, Donald Johanson of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, reconstructed it wrong…
I think that is a bit fishy. Additionally, couldn’t “distortions” account for many more differences?
Besides the re-reconstructed pelvic bone, Lucy and the bonobo are almost identical. The bonobo’s knees (and several other skeletal features) are relevant, because it shows how similar the bonobo is to Lucy. The bonobo is WAY more similar to Lucy than the normal chimp.
Do you agree that it is disingenuous to compare Lucy to a normal chimp when the bonobo is so much more alike?
Try to find one article or study comparing Lucy to a bonobo. Keep in mind, there are hundreds of articles comparing Lucy to a normal chimp. And they all use how different the normal chimp is from Lucy as proof of Lucy being a missing link. Almost all these differences vanish when comparing Lucy to a bonobo.
Keep in mind, at no point did I say anything about evolution. Me questioning the legitimacy of Lucy is not me questioning evolution. I like to keep my arguments narrow.
Please, the whole point of questioning Lucy is to question the theory of evolution.
Is it fishy, yes, but the other points about the knees and femur you're not questioning.
Do chimps and bonobos have a common ancestor? I honestly don't know. But that bonobo knees are the same as Lucy's knees does not bear any relation to the differences in the femur, let alone that fact that bonobos don't walk upright, whereas Lucy apparently did.
Questioning is how science works. To say I can’t question one evidence line of evolution without questioning all of evolution… sounds like a religion.
There is nothing to question about the knees and femur. The bonobo chimp has valgus knees and an identical femoral head and neck. And the bonobo ALSO walks upright.
"Questioning" is not how science works, that's a silly talking point that took off because covid tyranny. Science, more formally, is a process of knowledge acquisition that comes from making testable "questions," called hypotheses, and then sharing the results, which people talk/write about. Alchemy would have turned into chemistry in the Middle Ages ago but for the fact that everyone was working in secret.
I agree that scientism is akin to a materialist religion, and evolution advocates are particularly guilty of that fallacy. Let me lay my cards on the table, as a Christian, my denomination (and I) believe that God could use evolution to create modern human. Evolution as an ex nihilo explanation for humanity is wrong on the evidence.
The bonobo does not walk upright. Like chimps, they can for short distances. They are not like humans, who walk upright as a matter of course. That's very disingenuous of you to write.
Yea, the reconstruction story is fishy, but that's just the pelvis, not the knees and the femur. One maybe, sorta, kinda bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch, at least in this instance.
You say “‘Questioning’ is not how science works” but in the very next sentence say science is “making testable ‘questions,’ called hypotheses.”
And the bonobo DOES walk upright. I never said he walks exclusively upright. They are also much better bipedal walkers than chimps and have several bipedal muscular and skeletal traits that normal chimps DO NOT have. It is disingenuous of you to compare the upright walking of bonobos to chimps.
Additionally, there is NO way to know if australopithecus afarensis walked upright exclusively.
“Yea, the reconstruction story is fishy, but that's just the pelvis, not the knees and the femur.”
BONOBOS have the SAME knees and femurs! The only tangible difference is the “fishy” pelvis.
“Do bonobos and Lucy have a common ancestor?”
It is likely that the bonobo is a direct descendant of australopithecus afarensis. I think that is far more likely, given their similarities, than saying humans descended from australopithecus afarensis.
Do you think it is misleading to compare Lucy to a chimpanzee instead of a bonobo?
Do you think a bonobo is much more similar to Lucy?
I fully understand the argument as to why they re-reconstructed it. I just think it lacks credibility: During the fossilization process, the pelvic bone distorted. This distortion just happened to make it look like a normal chimp pelvic bone. It looked so much like a normal ape pelvic that the World renowned paleoanthropologist, Donald Johanson of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, reconstructed it wrong…
I think that is a bit fishy. Additionally, couldn’t “distortions” account for many more differences?
Besides the re-reconstructed pelvic bone, Lucy and the bonobo are almost identical. The bonobo’s knees (and several other skeletal features) are relevant, because it shows how similar the bonobo is to Lucy. The bonobo is WAY more similar to Lucy than the normal chimp.
Do you agree that it is disingenuous to compare Lucy to a normal chimp when the bonobo is so much more alike?
Try to find one article or study comparing Lucy to a bonobo. Keep in mind, there are hundreds of articles comparing Lucy to a normal chimp. And they all use how different the normal chimp is from Lucy as proof of Lucy being a missing link. Almost all these differences vanish when comparing Lucy to a bonobo.
Keep in mind, at no point did I say anything about evolution. Me questioning the legitimacy of Lucy is not me questioning evolution. I like to keep my arguments narrow.
Please, the whole point of questioning Lucy is to question the theory of evolution.
Is it fishy, yes, but the other points about the knees and femur you're not questioning.
Do chimps and bonobos have a common ancestor? I honestly don't know. But that bonobo knees are the same as Lucy's knees does not bear any relation to the differences in the femur, let alone that fact that bonobos don't walk upright, whereas Lucy apparently did.
Questioning is how science works. To say I can’t question one evidence line of evolution without questioning all of evolution… sounds like a religion.
There is nothing to question about the knees and femur. The bonobo chimp has valgus knees and an identical femoral head and neck. And the bonobo ALSO walks upright.
Source for bonobo upright walk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJSYQ9l-Xdw Source for femur, Just some ronding from age and maybe some “distortion”: https://gab.com/TheGreyGuy/posts/110069194596937737
You agree with most, if not all my points. We just came up with a different conclusion. Which is fine!
1- Lucy was originally reconstructed to have a normal ape pelvic bone.
2- later it was re-reconstructed to look human.
3- the reconstruction story is “fishy.”
4- Lucy and the bonobo look almost identical, and any differences can be explained with “distortions” from fossilizing.
5- Despite the similarities, there are no studies comparing them (fishy), but tons comparing them to chimpanzees. I made this to highlight my point. https://gab.com/TheGreyGuy/posts/110069336445670561
"Questioning" is not how science works, that's a silly talking point that took off because covid tyranny. Science, more formally, is a process of knowledge acquisition that comes from making testable "questions," called hypotheses, and then sharing the results, which people talk/write about. Alchemy would have turned into chemistry in the Middle Ages ago but for the fact that everyone was working in secret.
I agree that scientism is akin to a materialist religion, and evolution advocates are particularly guilty of that fallacy. Let me lay my cards on the table, as a Christian, my denomination (and I) believe that God could use evolution to create modern human. Evolution as an ex nihilo explanation for humanity is wrong on the evidence.
The bonobo does not walk upright. Like chimps, they can for short distances. They are not like humans, who walk upright as a matter of course. That's very disingenuous of you to write.
Yea, the reconstruction story is fishy, but that's just the pelvis, not the knees and the femur. One maybe, sorta, kinda bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch, at least in this instance.
Do bonobos and Lucy have a common ancestor?
You say “‘Questioning’ is not how science works” but in the very next sentence say science is “making testable ‘questions,’ called hypotheses.”
And the bonobo DOES walk upright. I never said he walks exclusively upright. They are also much better bipedal walkers than chimps and have several bipedal muscular and skeletal traits that normal chimps DO NOT have. It is disingenuous of you to compare the upright walking of bonobos to chimps.
Additionally, there is NO way to know if australopithecus afarensis walked upright exclusively.
“Yea, the reconstruction story is fishy, but that's just the pelvis, not the knees and the femur.”
BONOBOS have the SAME knees and femurs! The only tangible difference is the “fishy” pelvis.
“Do bonobos and Lucy have a common ancestor?”
It is likely that the bonobo is a direct descendant of australopithecus afarensis. I think that is far more likely, given their similarities, than saying humans descended from australopithecus afarensis.
Do you think it is misleading to compare Lucy to a chimpanzee instead of a bonobo?
Do you think a bonobo is much more similar to Lucy?