Terry Turner:
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).

Terry Turner:
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... :-)

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

[Terry Turner:]

Why was Lucy switched to a human ancestor in the first place?

I know there can be a good argument temporally. Meaning, she "Fits" several
takes on the timeline. And of course she's exactly where they need her to be,
in Africa, but why the switch?

She wasn't a human ancestor. That's what "Science" had determined. And then
somebody went out for breakfast one morning, ordered a soft boiled egg and
while they were reaching for their tea suddenly exclaimed:

"Jeeze, this shit is hot! And Lucy is a human ancestor!"

That's EXACTLY how it happened, as far as I know. If anyone knows any
differently then, PLEASE, post the details! Give us cites! Help us all to
understand how Lucy flipped from "Evolutionary cousin" to "Direct ancestor."

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/668269425555898368

On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:30:05 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
<littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

>I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man.

I'm certain that who said that is an ignoramus.

Pandora wrote:

> <littor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I am certain that Lucy is a falsification, like Piltdown Man.

> I'm certain that who said that is an ignoramus.

Well "Lucy as a human ancestor" very well might be a falsification.

Why did they switch her, decide she was an ancestor? If there a
good argument for doing so apart from Out of Africa purity which
was never correct in the first place?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/668533411654320128