Two Anniversaries Today: “Origin” and Lucy

Today is the 156th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species in 1859.

As if that weren’t enough, it’s also the 41st anniversary of the 1974 discovery of Lucy, the fossil of a species now known as Australopithecus afarensis. If you use Google, you’ll see Lucy in a progression of human evolution.

Ol’ Hambo just posted a rant about Lucy: Will Obama Celebrate Lucy Today?. One excerpt should be sufficient:

[Today’s] Google Doodle highlights where our culture is headed. Our supposed evolutionary ancestry is increasingly being celebrated — but it’s nothing more than a major tenet of the religion of naturalism. Google isn’t promoting science — they are promoting an interpretation of the past that is a key idea in the atheistic religion of naturalism. But as our culture moves farther and farther from biblical authority, we can only expect this kind of celebration of our alleged evolutionary past to continue, even creeping into the church.

But Lucy wasn’t a human ancestor. She’s just an extinct variety of ape. There is nothing about her to suggest that she’s a transitional form between ape-like and human-like. It’s simply an interpretation of the fossils from an evolutionary worldview.

So there you are. Darwin’s book has been incredibly influential, and Hambo ain’t no kin to Lucy. That’s the news today — at least so far. Feel free to use the comments for an Intellectual Free Fire Zone.

Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

19 responses to “Two Anniversaries Today: “Origin” and Lucy

  1. Yeah, I remember making the, “just an extinct ape,” argument more than a few times back in my creo-days. Even then I thought it was kind of dumb.

  2. michaelfugate

    But Ken, was Australopithecus afarensis on the Ark?

  3. So Ol’ Hambo is telling us that apes went extinct in the last 6000 years !!
    That means that Lucy missed the ark ride and was drowned OR Lucy type apes went extinct AFTER the flood. Both non-sensical claims.
    That said, one must recognize that HamBone is at least smart enough to know who butters his bread and puts food on his table.
    Droll Droolers. This nickname might best be replaced by the term Glib Droolers.

  4. I wonder why creationists accept that fossils are really the remains of once-living things. Wouldn’t it be far easier for them to say that they are frauds, or tricks of the devil, or anything other than what they seem to be? There seem to be some arguments which they are reluctant to make, while there are other times they are willing to make up the most outrageous claims.

  5. He states…”But as our culture moves farther and farther from biblical authority….” or the authority of any of the other books o’BS, life will get better, thinking my not as there are still large numbers of UFOs & conspira-Nuts.

  6. Ol Hambone once again fails to realize he needs to provide an example of his “alternative (faith based) interpretation” before he can expect his claims to be taken seriously.

    His willingness to disregard even the foundations of the religion he claims to believe in marks him as a cult leader over and over again.

    Hopefully the new governor will see the train wreck coming and not let his own career get derailed by Ken’s “alternative interpretation” of what constitutes secular government.

  7. There is a striking resemblance between Ham and the first figure after the Google letter “G.”

  8. michaelfugate

    I am not a monkey!
    Creationists pissed at Google!

  9. Ham would insist that a pair of the ‘ape’ kind was indeed on board Noah’s ship, and that somehow poor Lucy and her blood relatives all went mysteriously extinct during the last 4,000 years or so.

    But he would also presumably insist that they could not have walked any of the distance from Ararat to Ethiopia or elsewhere in Africa, since they could only ‘knuckle-walk’ on all fours (according to his fraudulent Creation Museum anyhow):
    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6018/750.abstract

  10. Says Ken:

    “According to evolutionists, Lucy walked on two legs”

    No, Ken. According to every reputable anatomist who has ever studied the bones, Lucy was fully bipedal, although handier at climbing trees than we are.

    “Sadly, this evolutionary influence is creeping into the church and being promoted by groups like BioLogos.”

    No, Ken. Evolution has been the accepted position of every major Christian church for at least the last sixty or seventy years. Among Christians, only a tiny fringe of so-called “literalists” refuse to countenance the idea that God created according to the natural law that He ordained. What Ken means by “church” is precisely that group. What he is saying is that evolutionary biology is making inroads even into this hard core. Even so small a support base as he has is eroding away.

    This is nothing less than a confession of defeat. It’s a cry of despair, and music to our ears.

    “Our supposed evolutionary ancestry is increasingly being celebrated”

    It’s not supposed, Ken, it’s an evidential fact. But, that aside, ditto. Congratulations on recognizing reality in at least this small way.

    For his is an admission of failure and defeat. Reality seeps in, even into a mind like Ken Ham’s He’s starting to recognize the inevitable: that he’s lost. Christians aren’t listening to him at all.

    So for Ken, now, the only way forward is back. Prediction: He’s going to break with the Christian church altogether. He’s going to become the prophet of his own religion.

    “Instead of anchoring his (Obama’s) worldview/morality to the absolute authority of God’s Word, he anchors it the bones of Lucy”

    Yes. Funny, that – The President of the United States bases his understanding of the Universe on evidential fact, not on myth re-told as instructive narrative by early iron-age scribes. Unless the American people lose their own minds entirely, that is likely to remain the case.

    Ken’s lost the debate. He knows he has lost. He lost decades ago, but he knows it now. And now that he knows he has lost, I am waiting with mild anticipation for him to lose it entirely.

  11. In Hambo’s screed, Dave Luckett finds

    nothing less than a confession of defeat. It’s a cry of despair, and music to our ears.
    …[snip]…
    Ken’s lost the debate. He knows he has lost. He lost decades ago, but he knows it now. And now that he knows he has lost, I am waiting with mild anticipation for him to lose it entirely.

    How I hope you are right—but, with respect, how much I fear you are wrong in this.

    Such bombastic and apocalyptic visions [like Hambo’s] of the imminent extinction of a dwindling, embattled band of the Only True Believers has been the standard stock-in-trade of fanatical rabble rousers for centuries, if not millennia. The revivalist preachers of the ‘Great Awakenings’ of 18th and 19th centuries America fired up their audiences (and emptied their pockets) with precisely the same sort of hysterical rhetoric: Satan is winning, even the churches are corrupt now, the world is doomed—and so are you, unless you follow me!

    In the world of Evangelism and fanaticism, nothing succeeds like excess. And the two most potent emotions to play on are (1) cold, crippling fear, and (2) the warmth of belonging to a small, elite fellowship of the saved. Desperate times call for desperate measures—and you can start by sacrificing worldly wealth to the cult leader.

    Why do you suppose that fanatics and cultists love to believe they are being persecuted, and will go so far out their way to ‘find evidence’ of such, right on down to Starbuck’s ‘War on Christmas’? You gotta stoke that fear to maintain your cash flow!

    So I’m afraid that Ham’s latest rant is not music to my ears, it’s just another dog whistle to his gullible flock. And I think it idle to look for any kind of decisive victory in America’s Culture Wars, it’s an age-old and eternal game of Whack-A-Mole. Which is not to say one should not engage, for it’s essential to challenge madness and idiocy wherever it rears its head. But that’s a struggle of containment only, with no final ‘victory’ possible; human folly will forever be with us.

  12. Just spotted an unintended ambiguity in my previous post:

    “bombastic and apocalyptic visions” refers to Hambo’s article, not to Dave Luckett’s post! Hope that was clear from the context–but on the interweb, no one can hear you scream…

    [*Voice from above*] I can hear your screams, and I enjoy them.

  13. For the IFFZ:

    Some exciting science to help wash away the dirty feeling that reading a Hambo rant leaves behind: the Advanced Virgo project is due to go live shortly. See The hunt for Albert Einstein’s missing waves

  14. Long before the likes of Elmer Gantry, there was James Hogg’s The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner in 1824 discussing the effects of Calvinism on the mind.

  15. To honour our far relative I offer

  16. Among Christians, only a tiny fringe of so-called “literalists” refuse to countenance the idea that God created according to the natural law that He ordained. What Ken means by “church” is precisely that group. What he is saying is that evolutionary biology is making inroads even into this hard core. Even so small a support base as he has is eroding away.

    If only that were true. But according to this poll, more than four in ten Americans believe the Genesis story outright, and a good chunk of the remainder believe evolution occurred under God’s guidance. That’s not exactly a “tiny fringe.” (At least one of the GOP presidential contenders this time around, Ben Carson, is a creationist. And he’s a top-tier contender for the Republican presidential nomination.)

  17. Saw this at another blog that is available on the internet (not read in full): http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2015/11/good-article-in.html

  18. @Eric Lipps
    I’m no specialist on polling, but I have difficulties about the wording of that poll. My guess is that a lot of people when given the choices, would tend to answer with the one that sounds most like “I am a good Bible-believing Christian”.
    They weren’t given an option like: God created humans, but that could be much more than 10,000 years ago, or: God created humans that were cave-dwellers or Neanderthals or something different from us, or even: I haven’t thought much about how or when God created us.