Robert Jastrow:
this brain was not large in size, being 1/3 the size of a human skull.
obviously it is simply an ape.

New Scientist: Lucy had a modern chimpanzee skull

Sushi -- unfortunately there are people who are still so ensconced in
superstition and fiction that they refuse to look at the scientific
realities -- and that's fine, that's their right! But they shouldn't go
out of their way to keep the rest of us in the Dark Ages. I came in
here looking for a discussion and -- well, you see how this has turned
out.

By the way, I was informed of a site that listed a number of "evolution
frauds." That site is owned and operated by the Northwest Creation
Network. No surprise there; they have an agenda.

And that's really what this is all about: science makes observations and
tries to test them, and assemble the results into a coherent system.
Religion starts with an agenda, a pre-existing belief system, based on
nothing but superstition and mythology, and tries to fit whatever it can
into it; whatever doesn't fit is either ignored or twisted beyond
recognition.

so anything a religious group comes up with is bogus? you might be
suprised to find that there are legions of intelligent pepole who are
christians.

there some evidence for ya.theres a ton more. just dont have my greasy
ape like hands onit right now. my guess is that youll bager me instead
of doing honest impartial research on it. hope im wrong.

Honestly Bill yes in away it is bogus. Of course they are going to want
to say it is a fraud because they want people to see there WAY and
nobody else's.

i have already argued that the scientists tout this evolution theory as
fact, and then try to find collaborating evidence to support thier
claim, and failing this, simply ignore the facts and make it up as they
go.

ive given you seven juicy clues so far, how many do you want?

i duno how much you know about archaeology, but in every single string
or our ancestry, the brain size diminishes the older back you search,
before lucy, the brains were smaller, and after her, they got bigger.

i dont accept that as evidence.

look up lucy's skull. and look at it. then try to find the modern
chimpanzee that it matches...
good luck!

lucy had unique characteristics such as her femur ratio, approximately
halfway inbetween human and chimpanzee, her skull, similar to previous
a.australopithecus, contained more teeth, which had evolved from
previous species to better adapt to the surroundings .. on the was to
homo sapiens

And what does Christianity have? A few people making up ONE book? Heck I
can do that too. Like a good friend of mine said I can take the Sears
catolage from like 1972 and call it a religion.

Rambill -- this is from Johanson's book -- remember, he is the
DISCOVERER of Lucy:

"The cranial fragments meanwhile suggested a very small brain, not much
larger than that of a chimpanzee; indeed, at three and a half feet tall,
Lucy was about the size of a chimp."

But there is more than just the skull in question:

"The crucial question was, Did Lucy's hip joint work like ours, or like
that of an ape? Owen demonstrated convincingly that the abductors --
the hip muscles -- employed in stabilizing the hip in bipeds operated in
Lucy just as they did in modern humans."

It goes on to say more about this topic, but I think the point has been
made. Lucy was not a chimp.

Cro- Magnum man....virtually indistguishible from modern man. obviously
human. --- the book LUCY. SEE ALSO ICE, by fred hoyle.

rambill... we dont really want juicy clues... ones that really dont
contradict the theory of evolution anyway.. rather a link to some sort
of article or somthing .. perhaps something that was "all over the news"
(on the christian channel) 3 years ago..


im just baffled that somehow the rest of us managed to sleep through
this breaking news story

Homo erectus:the limb and skull bones are indistgusshable from modern
humans... Encyclopedia Brittanica

If he had anything of substance to say, he wouldn't waste time with this
"clue" nonsense -- I think the point has been made. Bill, if you ever
do dig up any of those references you claim to have, e-mail me with the
information, because I really would like to know if there's anything at
all on the other side of this topic --

not the christian channel... EVERY CHANNEL

UP TO NINE NOW AND THATS JUST USING MY APE LIKE BRAIN TO REMEMBER STUFF
IVE READ OVER THE YEARS.

***staggerin' walks thru the front door and exit out thru the back***

South African anthropologist Raymond Dart discovered the first
australopithecine specimen, a child’s skull, at a quarry in Taung, South
Africa, in 1925. Dart named the fossil Australopithecus africanus,
meaning “southern ape from Africa.” At the time of this discovery, most
anthropologists believed that humans had evolved in Asia rather than
Africa. The scientific community rejected Dart’s claim to have found an
ancestor of modern humans in southern Africa. For the next 20 years,
Dart collaborated with Scottish paleontologist Robert Broom. Together
they found many more australopithecine fossils. In the mid-1940s, the
scientific community finally accepted these australopithecine fossils as
proof that humans evolved in Africa.

Microsoft ® Encarta ® Encyclopedia 2005 © 1993-2004 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.



Seems to be so much more out there proving your theory false. I could
bring up more if you want. Cause you see. I too have an
encyclopedia

i just don't quite understand how everyone else in the world missed this
break through if it were on every channel...


homo erectus are like the final step before homo sapiens . (us)

it makes sense that they were extrememly similar to humans.. with a few
differences in the shape of jaw and size of teeth of course,

they also had about 75% of the brain capacity

HAHAHAHAHA

these are all clues from your memory???



NIICE

this is kind of getting old..


rambill... you can stay in your little bubble.. god created humans,
ignore the evidence, your only hurting yourself... just try not to
have any kids k?