AL 288-1 "Lucy"

Transitional species that show apes beginning to walk up right

File: sts14.jpg (37KB, 631x841px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 631x841px

We already had examples of that in the form of complete skulls and intact pelvises. I'm talking more in a cultural sense.

>>1703449
you mean what did lucy do to our culture, or what culture did lucy have?

lucy probably didn't have more culture than simple spears, and probably only had nongrammatical language.

>>1703497
Meant more like cultural impact, as in "what did she do for our culture as a whole?"

>>1703051
Just another hoax in a long line of hoaxes looking for a "missing link" that does not exist.

File: 1471768741028.png (14KB, 399x391px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 399x391px

>>1703497
> nongramatical language
how would that even work?

File: that_s_bait.gif (3MB, 300x252px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x252px

>>1703517

>>1703051
satan's snare

>>1703515
fuck if I know nigger. she's just one monkey skeleton

I think the camps for and against evolution had already been set way before that. I could be wrong though

>>1703521
ooga booga'ing

it's obvious that language was a gradual process. we don't know what a transitional or prototypical grammar was like among early hominids, but it was probably somewhere between koko and pygmy languages.

the progression was probably nouns>verbs>adjectives>adverbs>verb tense>articles/particles/advanced grammar in order of abstraction.

you'll note that even today blacks have trouble with verb tense and articles in grammar.

File: 1024x1024.jpg (52KB, 689x1024px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 689x1024px

>>1703579
>ooga booga'ing
You realize the size of the skull and mandible indicate this being had a somewhat larger capacity for speech than a chimpanzee, yet still much farther removed from anything we would consider "proto-speech.

>>1703592
chimpanzees already have nouns, and they have non-language indications for verbs and imperatives, which probably indicate that they are close to developing words for those things. koko the gorilla could express limited adjectives but was fairly proficient at verbs. there seems to be a neurological heirarchy for the complexity of these subjects.

even dogs can be taught to recognize things based on qualities.

what I don't believe is that human speech EXPLODED out of nowher and all of a sudden humans were neurologically uniform. language obviously operated in a selection environment. the changes and their ability to be selected from the population at large had to be setbefore it could become a quality for sexual selection.

>>1703592
Was meant to be a question.

File: wikipedian_protester.png (9KB, 120x120px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 120x120px

>>1703620
>chimps have nouns.

>>1703592
The most telling indicator of capacity for vocalization is throat structure, hyoid bone morphology, etc., not brain size, at least in early-middle hominins.

>>1703051
I guess she was fuel for the fire that was (and is) debate over creationism and evolution, especially in the USA.

>>1703051
fabrication

>>1703632
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-28023630

are you stupid?

even most animals from the simian family, most of whom are pretty stupid, have verbal words for at least predators.

>>1703650
Honestly your knowledge of linguistics is laughable, the history of language isn't just successive integration of different parts of speech.

Also human language is one very specific mode of communication; not all animal "languages" have to fill the same mold.

>>1703676
honestly, you're talking out of your ass

we have zero idea how any of it began, but an explosion argument is the stupidest

and we're not talking "animal" languages, we're talking about prehuman languages. which would necessarily be similar to ours.

also, you didn't even know chimps had words, so you can fuck off

File: chimplucy.jpg (47KB, 635x542px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 635x542px

>>1703639
Upper mandible is also a good indicator. Considering many of the more complete australopithecine skulls we've found show that their palate is more chimp-like, having less room to form complex noises, it seems likely they couldn't "ooga-booga" but "duh."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/11/28/what-did-australopithecines-sound-like-more-duh-than-ugg/#.V9yJiMtOlnE

File: denying.gif (125KB, 422x631px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 422x631px

>>1703647
Anything to back up that claim?

>>1703712
the bible

>>1703449
Lucy came with a knee joint

>>1703051
none, as ppl keep on religions, which are stupod and shortsigthed

>>1703697
I'm not the person you responded to, dipshit; the comment you replied to was my first in the discussion. I just wanted to expose your absolute ignorance on the topic of linguistics.

I don't know enough about the topic to weigh in on whether early hominins spoke, or how they spoke, but it is unlikely that ancestral species like Australipithecis afarensis communicated using anything reminiscent of modern language. Maybe mid-late members of Homo did; we'll never know.

File: what-they-found1.png (228KB, 280x424px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 280x424px

>>1703729
No, she came with a left femur and a right tibia. What you are referring to is Johanson's Knee, which was found several kilometers from that site. However, when one compares the tibia found in Lucy to that of Johanson's Knee, they appear very similar.

>>1703708
Comparative anatomy is a useful means of determining the range of sounds an extinct species might have produced; I know Kanzi, the very intelligent bonobo, attempts to vocalize words, since he had a very large vocabulary, but is physically incapable of it.

This is is pretty morbid and I would never condone it, but it would be interesting to surgically alter his throat/larynx/mouth/skull to allow him to produce human sounds.

>>1703051
It's fabricated by "scientists" to prove the theory of evolution.

In truth the Earth is only 6000 years old and we are the creation of God.

>>1703753
this

>>1703743
all I ever said is that it was likely transitional. Being able to study their language would provide strong clues about how human language evolved, and what parts evolved first.

we don't know "how" it evolved, but all I was saying is that the transitional element would lack increasingly complicated aspects of speech.

File: 1463966368296.jpg (60KB, 468x336px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 468x336px

>>1703449
It was the closest to a complete skeleton though. It's very rare to find a specimen that complete.

So rare that the only hominid skeleton/s (I think there's only one, a child correct me though) more complete are neanderthals.

Don't forget the famous story of her name. Lucy from the Beetles "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"

File: national-museum.jpg (15KB, 337x450px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 337x450px

>>1703911
You're thinking of Selam, an infant/toddler of the species. Others include Kadanuumuu, sts-14 which was shown in the pic your esponded to, Mrs Ples which was a skull, as well as the First Family which consisted of bones from around 13 individuals.

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/lucy/lucy-the-knuckle-walking-abomination/

>>1704005
are they calling beyonce an abomination?

that's racist. she's a beautiful woman