Jump to content


Photo

Out Of Place Fossils Falsify Evolution


  • Please log in to reply
561 replies to this topic

#561 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 751 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 08 December 2016 - 01:16 AM

The only bones in the Laetoli area are Lucy's species. This is Tanzania. The Burtele fossil foot was found in Ethiopia.

#562 indydave

indydave

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,801 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Indianapolis, IN

Posted 08 December 2016 - 03:06 PM

The only bones in the Laetoli area are Lucy's species. This is Tanzania. The Burtele fossil foot was found in Ethiopia.

 

The bones in Ethiopia are what we are talking about...when we are trying to figure what an afarensis foot looks like.  It was THE EV's who connected the Ethiopia bones (Lucy) to the Laetoli tracks in Tanzania.  So your point...IF it is valid...means that we should ASSUME that the Burtele foot is the same species as the other creature already documented IN ETHIOPIA.  There is virtually NO EVIDENCE to indicate what type of hallux Lucy had, OTHER THAN THE TRACKS.  And the ONLY hallux evidence there is (Burtelle/BRT and AL 333-54).  The points I've made here have NOT been refuted by you with this point (that it can't be human tracks if we have no human bones in that layer, YET) .  There are only TWO hallux bones that are in the area where afarensis was found...and BOTH ARE OPPOSABLE.  That means that there is no good reason to connect the Ethiopia bones (Lucy) with the Laetoli footprints.  NONE AT ALL.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users