1. Topics
  2. Was Lucy Our Ancestor?

Was Lucy Our Ancestor?

fceska_gr
 

Sadly, the creationist has some good points, but for the wrong reasons. (A lot of crap too!) OTOH, the rebuttal presenter / science adherent wrongly talks about Lucy being transitional between chimps and humans, when chimps and humans are both equally progressed from a common ancestor.

It took me a while to figure out what they were both talking about - the presentation is not great, but it's worth a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6flIeYmvnk


--
Francesca
terry turner
 

Nothing to apologize for. Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points. Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
One day they will discover AAT and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.
Terry

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 6:57 AM fceska_gr via groups.io <f-ceska=odysseysailing.gr@groups.io> wrote:
Sadly, the creationist has some good points, but for the wrong reasons.
(A lot of crap too!) OTOH, the rebuttal presenter / science adherent
wrongly talks about Lucy being transitional between chimps and humans,
when chimps and humans are both equally progressed from a common ancestor.

It took me a while to figure out what they were both talking about - the
presentation is not great, but it's worth a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6flIeYmvnk


--
Francesca
Allan Krill
 
Edited

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 05:50 PM, terry turner wrote:
Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points. Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical. One day they will discover AAT and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.
I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man. But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established paleoanthropologists and creationists will not retract their published views.

In my research on the ridicule and denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong. It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win. But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play and tell themselves that they still might win. It has to do with honor and respect for the institutions they belong to. And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents and skills. 

I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p. 276-282. But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees. (My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor and referees, but then I withdrew it and made it freely available on the internet.) 

--
AquaticApe.net
Marc Verhaegen
 

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 05:50 PM, terry turner wrote:

TT:
Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.
I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man.

Lucy is no human ancestor, but most likely IMO an early relative of Gorilla
(1994 Hum.Evol.9:121-139, 1996 Hum.Evol.11:35-41).

TT:
But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Terry, where can we find it?

Some people do revise their opinion, e.g. prof.Tobias.
At the first day of the Ghent symposium in 1999 (organized by M, I was waiting in the aula for the other contributors to come. Prof.Tobias entered the aula and came straight to me, I was rreally afraid he was going to accuse me of attacking the science of paleo-anthropology, but he opened his arms & embraced me... :-)
Marc Verhaegen
 

Sorry, this was accidentally sent too early,
here's the definite version.

TT:
Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.
I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man.

Lucy was no human ancestor IMO, but most likely an early relative of Gorilla
(1994 Hum.Evol.9:121-139, 1996 Hum.Evol.11:35-41).


TT:
But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Terry, where can we find it?
Yes, there might be remarkable parallels with football. :-)
And there are indeed strong parallels between the rejection of contin.drift & AAT.

But some people do revise their opinion, e.g. prof.Tobias.
At the first day of the Ghent symposium in 1999 (organized by Mario Vaneechoutte), I was waiting in the aula for the other contributors to come.
Prof.Tobias entered the aula and came straight to me, I was very afraid he was going to accuse me of attacking the science of paleo-anthropology, but he opened his arms & embraced me... :-)
fceska_gr
 

Marc,

You've mixed up two separate posts.

TT:
 Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
 Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
 One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.

AK: 
I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man. But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Francesca

On 22/11/2021 12:12 π.μ., Marc Verhaegen wrote:
Sorry, this was accidentally sent too early,
here's the definite version.

 TT:
 Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
 Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
 One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.

 Lucy was no human ancestor IMO, but most likely an early relative of Gorilla
 (1994 Hum.Evol.9:121-139,  1996 Hum.Evol.11:35-41).


TT:
But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Terry, where can we find it?
Yes, there might be remarkable parallels with football.  :-)
And there are indeed strong parallels between the rejection of contin.drift & AAT.

But some people do revise their opinion, e.g. prof.Tobias.
At the first day of the Ghent symposium in 1999 (organized by Mario Vaneechoutte), I was waiting in the aula for the other contributors to come.
Prof.Tobias entered the aula and came straight to me, I was very afraid he was going to accuse me of attacking the science of paleo-anthropology, but he opened his arms & embraced me...  :-)



--
Francesca Mansfield Odyssey Sailing Tel: 0030 24280 94128 Mobile/WhatsAp: +30 6974 659 156 f-ceska@...
terry turner
 

Thank you, I was not sure what happened.
Terry

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 5:20 AM fceska_gr via groups.io <f-ceska=odysseysailing.gr@groups.io> wrote:

Marc,

You've mixed up two separate posts.

TT:
 Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
 Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
 One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.

AK: 
I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man. But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Francesca

On 22/11/2021 12:12 π.μ., Marc Verhaegen wrote:
Sorry, this was accidentally sent too early,
here's the definite version.

 TT:
 Supporters of a proposition do a poor job of finding its weak points.
 Creationists make a cottage industry of picking apart everything that does not sound biblical.
 One day they will discover AAT, and it will be interesting to see what they do with it.

 Lucy was no human ancestor IMO, but most likely an early relative of Gorilla
 (1994 Hum.Evol.9:121-139,  1996 Hum.Evol.11:35-41).


TT:
But even when this hoax is thrown out, and when AAT replaces savanna theory, established PAs & creationists will not retract their published views.
In my research on the ridicule & denial of continental drift (very similar to AAT), I realized that self-respecting scientists don't change sides, even when it's obvious that they have been completely wrong.
It's like in football — halfway through a match, one team may be so far behind that they have no chance to win.
But no one changes shirts and joins the other team. They continue to play, and tell themselves that they still might win.
It has to do with honor & respect for the institutions they belong to.
And by continuing, they further demonstrate their talents & skills.
I wrote much more about this in my first book on the history of continental drift, p.276-282.
But I deleted those pages in the revised version of my book, because they would surely not be allowed by the editor or referees.
(My revised book was accepted by a scientific editor & referees, but then I withdrew it, and made it freely available on the internet.)

Terry, where can we find it?
Yes, there might be remarkable parallels with football.  :-)
And there are indeed strong parallels between the rejection of contin.drift & AAT.

But some people do revise their opinion, e.g. prof.Tobias.
At the first day of the Ghent symposium in 1999 (organized by Mario Vaneechoutte), I was waiting in the aula for the other contributors to come.
Prof.Tobias entered the aula and came straight to me, I was very afraid he was going to accuse me of attacking the science of paleo-anthropology, but he opened his arms & embraced me...  :-)



--
Francesca Mansfield Odyssey Sailing Tel: 0030 24280 94128 Mobile/WhatsAp: +30 6974 659 156 f-ceska@...
1 - 7 of 7