Lucy is but one of many, take a look at post #14, and onwards, for some rather in depth discussions regarding the feet.
I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think it to large a assumption to assume Lucy had human like feet, if others of the same species are found.
So science is now assuming evidence? I am often ask where is my evidence when I claim something for creation. Now it's ok for evolutionist to assume, but not a creationist?
By the way, if the others are not found. Then this display indoctrinates, and is not education. Which proves that evolution is a religion. Because do you not have to have faith in the unseen to make such a claim? And will that faith continue when it is never found?Believing in the unseen is religion:
jn 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen
, and yet have believed.
2cor 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.And now for the verse that really defines it:
heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
You are speaking of evidence that has not been found. so you base your defense in the hope that they will find it. Which means that you have faith that they will, or you would not have step the over bounds of defending unfound evidence.
Just like in the other thread. I have hope that the canopy can work, and I see the possibility that it will. So I believe in what I cannot see, and with no evidence that it ever happened.
Lucy is made out to have hands and feet that are human. You have hope that this is correct. And can see the possibility that is is correct. But because their is not evidence that it is correct, you cannot say for sure, even though you will defend it as if it is so. So you base hope in the unseen based on the faith that what you believe is true.