The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Quasimodo »

My wife and I spent a lovely afternoon at the Bowers Museum in Santa Anna, CA. The major exhibit was of the REAL fossils of "Lucy". Australopithecus afarensis, an upright walking ancestor that is 3.2 million years old.

I've been reading and seeing documentaries for many years about her. To actually see her up close was beyond amazing. For a medical illustrator, seeing the similarities to modern humans of her knee joints and pelvis, proximal femur, etc. was actually a little moving.

If anyone is in the area and has an interest, I would highly suggest you make an effort to go. The exhibit lasts until April 28th.

http://www.bowers.org/index.php/art/exhibitions_listing/current

A humorous aside. While I was there, a skeptical older lady seriously ask how they really knew her name was "Lucy" (I immediately thought of Tobin). The docent patiently explained that it was a nick name given by Donald Johanson (the paleontologist who found her) when he was examining the fossils at his base camp and the Beatles' song "Lucy in the sky with diamonds" was playing on a cassette tape.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _ajax18 »

I think it was shocking for the first Europeans to see apes and realize how similar they are to humans.

But yeah, Quasi I find evolution fascinating. I still struggle to slow it down and imagine how it might have looked at each stage. Perhaps developing nonopposable toes happened quickly since that DNA was already in our animal ancestry and just needed a few repressor genes to be turned off.

Imagine if the Neanderthals would have survived. How would we treat them now?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _moksha »

ajax18 wrote:
Imagine if the Neanderthals would have survived. How would we treat them now?


Most likely as fellow conservatives.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_krose
_Emeritus
Posts: 2555
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:18 pm

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _krose »

moksha wrote:
ajax18 wrote:
Imagine if the Neanderthals would have survived. How would we treat them now?


Most likely as fellow conservatives.

OMG.

Please never leave us. You are a board treasure.
"The DNA of fictional populations appears to be the most susceptible to extinction." - Simon Southerton
_Brackite
_Emeritus
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:12 am

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Brackite »

moksha wrote:
ajax18 wrote:
Imagine if the Neanderthals would have survived. How would we treat them now?


Most likely as fellow conservatives.


What about the Liberals that are running California now?
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _bcspace »

What about the Liberals that are running California now?


They are indeed regressive enough to qualify as Neanderthals.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Droopy »

bcspace wrote:
What about the Liberals that are running California now?


They are indeed regressive enough to qualify as Neanderthals.



Yes, but a rather unlikeable subspecies:

Image
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Quasimodo »

ajax18 wrote:I think it was shocking for the first Europeans to see apes and realize how similar they are to humans.

But yeah, Quasi I find evolution fascinating. I still struggle to slow it down and imagine how it might have looked at each stage. Perhaps developing nonopposable toes happened quickly since that DNA was already in our animal ancestry and just needed a few repressor genes to be turned off.

Imagine if the Neanderthals would have survived. How would we treat them now?


Hi ajax,

Apparently she had feet similar to ours:

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/02/lucy-had-a-spring-in-her-step.html

That was a very good question.

There is a lot of contention at the moment, but some experts believe that we all have a little Neanderthal DNA in our genes (despite the later comments on this thread) :lol:
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey quasi :smile:

Quasimodo wrote:My wife and I spent a lovely afternoon at the Bowers Museum in Santa Anna, CA. The major exhibit was of the REAL fossils of "Lucy". Australopithecus afarensis, an upright walking ancestor that is 3.2 million years old.


Cool!

I've been reading and seeing documentaries for many years about her. To actually see her up close was beyond amazing. For a medical illustrator, seeing the similarities to modern humans of her knee joints and pelvis, proximal femur, etc. was actually a little moving.


I bet she was just as moved to see you. :smile:


The docent patiently explained that it was a nick name given by Donald Johanson (the paleontologist who found her) when he was examining the fossils at his base camp and the Beatles' song "Lucy in the sky with diamonds" was playing on a cassette tape.


That's the story of how she was named Lucy? Way cool! Thanks for sharing that. (I think he should have named her Diamond)

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: The real Lucy. 3.2 million years old.

Post by _Quasimodo »

Ceeboo wrote:Hey quasi :smile:

Quasimodo wrote:My wife and I spent a lovely afternoon at the Bowers Museum in Santa Anna, CA. The major exhibit was of the REAL fossils of "Lucy". Australopithecus afarensis, an upright walking ancestor that is 3.2 million years old.


Cool!

I've been reading and seeing documentaries for many years about her. To actually see her up close was beyond amazing. For a medical illustrator, seeing the similarities to modern humans of her knee joints and pelvis, proximal femur, etc. was actually a little moving.


I bet she was just as moved to see you. :smile:


The docent patiently explained that it was a nick name given by Donald Johanson (the paleontologist who found her) when he was examining the fossils at his base camp and the Beatles' song "Lucy in the sky with diamonds" was playing on a cassette tape.


That's the story of how she was named Lucy? Way cool! Thanks for sharing that. (I think he should have named her Diamond)

Peace,
Ceeboo


Hi Ceeboo!

It was a wonderful day. Lucy displayed no emotion when we met. I guess you get a little jaded after three million years.

They even had "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" playing quietly in the display room.

Good to see you!
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Post Reply