Lucy's Fall From Science

Welcome to today's webinar.

Today, we're going to be taking a look at Lucy, one of the leading icons of human evolution.

Lucy is widely used in school textbooks for promoting the idea that humans evolved from ape -like

creatures beginning millions of years.

Ago.

She's also predominantly displayed in museums across the country, oftentimes with exaggerated human characteristics

that are not based on her actual fossils.

Today, we'll take a critical review of Lucy and debunk the idea that she's our ancestor.

And we'll do this using research that's been conducted mostly by evolutionists and published in peer -reviewed

scientific journals.

Here's a short introduction to our website, genesisapologetics .com.

Our website provides an easy way for parents, youth pastors, and students to look up their public school

textbook to reveal the evolutionary content that's being taught in each.

In California, for example, evolutionary theory is taught as fact in sixth grade world history, seventh grade

life science, and 10th grade biology.

After selecting the textbook used by your school, clickable links and videos guide you towards easy rebuttals

for the evolutionary teaching based on both scientific and biblical grounds.

Here's a short review of some of our publications.

Our creation versus evolution book was first released a few years ago and focuses mainly on the

evolutionary topics that are included in most high school biology textbooks.

In 2015, our debunking human evolution book was published, which covers many of the topics we'll be discussing in today's webinar.

Our most recent project is the debunking evolution series, which is offered free online at

debunkevolution .com, or it can be ordered from our website.

This series debunks the central pillars of evolution taught in most of today's classrooms and is

currently also being sold by Answers in Genesis, the leading creation ministry in the US.

First, it's important to note that Christians hold different views on the creation account described in the book of Genesis.

Our ministry holds to the literal historical position, taking the account as a plainly stated

historical account of how God created our world and everything in it.

This position holds that the six days described in the first chapter of Genesis are days just like we know them now,

and that the creation week occurred about 6 ,000 years ago based on the interlinking genealogies in Genesis

that go right back to Adam.

This position is also held by leading creation ministries such as Creation Ministries International,

Answers in Genesis, the Institute for Creation Research, and Creation Today.

The vast majorities of private Christian schools and homeschoolers also hold to this position.

By the way of overview, this webinar will cover the biblical creation account of humans, the significance that

Lucy has in each person's worldview, how evolutionists work hard to promote the idea of human evolution, and

why this topic is important to debunk.

Also, we're currently producing an in -depth documentary on Lucy that'll explain much more about her discovery,

show the actual bones uncovered, and make the case why she isn't an evolutionary transition.

Please send us an email letting us know you'd like a copy, and we'll send it to you free of charge.

That email is staff at genesisapologetics .com.

And at the end of the seminar, we'll provide you with a link to request a free student guide and DVD.

To start out, it's important to admit that Christians believe in miracles.

Moses parting the Red Sea, Jesus and Peter walking on water, Jesus multiplying

the fish and bread, and Jesus' resurrection.

These are miracles, just like in Genesis, where God spoke creation into existence.

1 Peter 1 .25 is clear that God's word will last forever, and it's by

God's word that we can know these things to be true.

This authority and belief in God's word is just as central to the gospel message as it is to

understanding other events described in God's word, like the creation account.

Here are several verses that describe God's word to be consistently true, unchanging, perfect,

permanent, and even honored by God above his own name.

It's with this degree of reverence that we approach the scriptures today and explore the biblical

creation account, and contrast that with secular ideas of how humans evolved.

To compare and contrast the biblical and secular ideas about human origins, we'll start by looking at the

who, what, when, where, and why.

Genesis 1 .26 through 28.

Then God said, let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.

Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all

the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

So God created man in his own image.

In the image of God, he created them.

Male and female, he created them.

Then God blessed them and said to them, be fruitful and multiply.

Fill the earth and subdue it.

Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on

the earth.

You know, these verses in the first chapter of Genesis describe our very beginnings.

While the Bible's expressly clear that there's one God, Genesis says, let us create

man in our own image.

God the Father is speaking to the Trinity here.

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, as well as the host of heaven and angels when he says,

let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.

Evidence of this is shown by the triune nature of man, which we'll take a look at shortly.

God created humans as the last, final event of his creative works on the sixth day of creation

and commanded us to take dominion and govern the earth and all that lives within it.

Note that humans were made as the grand finale of God's creation, put here immediately after the animal kingdom

was created and asked by God himself to rule over it and take dominion.

An acronym we use when teaching the human creation account in Genesis is said, S,

spirit was breathed into us, A, above the animals, I, image of God,

and D, dominion.

God created us out of the dust of the earth, then he breathed his spirit into us, created

us above the animal kingdom in his image, and then gave us the dominion charge to rule over all of

creation.

One of the best ways to interpret scripture is by using other scripture passages.

In other words, letting scripture interpret scripture.

When Genesis 1 .26 states, let us make man in our image and in our likeness,

it's clear that we are made much differently than the animals.

God did not say this about any of his other creative works, but only when creating humans.

And the Bible's clear in several places that we were made as spirit, our eternal being, soul, our

mind, will, and emotions, and our physical bodies.

Mark 10 .6, but at the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.

So Jesus himself was clear on this truth as well, stating that humans were created at the very beginning of

creation, not thousands or millions of years after God began creation.

God himself wrote the 10 commandments, and in the fourth commandment, God makes it clear that he did

this in six 24 -hour days.

These days don't represent long periods of time, but rather the creation week gives us the basis

for the same week we have today.

For in six days, the Lord made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and he

rested on the seventh day.

Therefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

The Lord was being quite comprehensive here, stating that he created the heavens, earth, sea, and everything in

them in six days.

There's certainly not too many other ways to interpret this.

God wants us to believe this just as he wrote it.

Okay, now that we've covered that the creation week was a literal week consisting of six days, we can look at when the

Bible places that week in world history.

Adam was the first man created, and the Bible records how long he lived before having a son, how long he

lived afterwards, and how long he lived overall.

This three -step age description is provided not only for Adam, but for 33 other patriarchs in the

first 11 chapters of Genesis.

Looking at just the first 10 that are listed in Genesis 5, we can simply just add up the years to arrive at the

total number of years before the worldwide flood of Noah's time, about 1

,656 years after creation.

By adding up the genealogies provided in the remaining part of chapter five and chapters 10 and 11, we

find that these interlinking and overlapping genealogies lead to about 2 ,000 years from Adam

to Abraham, and then it's 2 ,000 years from Abraham to Christ, and about 2 ,000 years from

Christ to today.

Even if there are gaps in these genealogies, there's certainly not enough room for inserting thousands or

millions of years between today and the creation of Adam on the sixth day of creation week.

The same historic view of the Old Testament, including the book of Genesis, was apparently also held by Jesus.

In fact, the New Testament records a total of 42 times where Jesus refers back to the

Old Testament, and in each of these, the Old Testament's treated historically with real events

and people.

Specifically, Jesus referred to Adam and Eve as real historical people, created at the very

beginning of creation.

Jesus also acknowledged that Cain and Abel, Noah and the great flood, Sodom and Gomorrah were also

real, and acknowledged that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch, which is

included in the book of Genesis.

Here's a chart showing the lifespans of the first 22 patriarchs listed in the Bible.

Because the Bible lists how old the patriarchs were when they had sons, who are also listed in the genealogies, and how

long they lived, these genealogies are both overlapping and interlinking.

This graph shows the lifespan of the first 10 patriarchs listed in Genesis.

Well, except for Enoch, who was taken to heaven by God before natural death.

Note that the average lifespan was 912 years old.

These patriarchs were all born in an old world which was destroyed by the flood.

Not only did people live longer in this old world, but it was also inhabited by dinosaurs and plant life

that was much different than those we have on the planet today.

The fossil record holds some of the evidence of Noah's flood that was destroyed in this old world.

And this fossil record includes massive sauropod dinosaurs with nasal passages less than twice the

size of horses, but were 20 times larger that could not breathe in today's world.

Giant pterosaurs with 50 foot wingspans that could not fly in today's atmosphere, and

giant plants that are nowhere on the planet today.

The climate changes that were caused by the flood, along with the genetic entropy of the human gene pool, led to

people having much shorter lifespans, which we'll look at next.

This chart shows the rapid, systematic decline of lifespans recorded in the Bible that occurred after the

flood.

The amazing thing about these lifespans is that they fit a nearly perfect mathematical model.

In fact, a curved downward slope explains about 96 % of the data points.

Wow, this is incredible because the biblical manuscripts were recorded, compiled, and

copied by different authors who spanned different lifetimes.

Mapping such historical data into such a perfectly sloping curve like this would have been next to impossible.

So either these lifespans are historical, or they're fabricated by multiple authors who

willingly conspired over several generations.

In reality, these data fit what biologists recognize as a biological decay curve.

This indicates that the Genesis lifespans are real, recorded history.

But is there any scientific support for humans originating just 6 ,000 years ago?

Actually, there is.

Here's a study published by the secular journal Nature Genetics that revealed that the empirical observed

mutation rates of mitochondrial DNA points back to the first woman emerging only

6 ,500 years ago.

Here's another study reported by Anne Gibbons, science writer, who admits that the latest mutation rate clock shows

that humans originated just 6 ,000 years ago, and these findings are even being adopted in forensic

analysis by the FBI.

In this study, completed by several leading scientists, revealed that a massive DNA

variety explosion event happened roughly 5 ,000 years ago, which is in the ballpark for

when the dispersion from the Tower of Babel took place.

Okay, so now on to the where question on human origins.

God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, which was cataclysmically destroyed by the flood about 4 ,300

years ago.

Now, evolutionists differ on where they believe the cradle of mankind rests, but most agree that it was

somewhere in Africa.

Perhaps the most important question regarding our origins is why?

Even King David asked this question and marveled that God was even mindful of us.

I suppose the short answer is that God loves us and wants us to be a part of His eternal plan with a meaningful

experience both in this life and in the next.

Evolution, however, has no apparent reason or purpose for our existence.

Next, we'll take a closer focus on some of the major differences between the biblical origin of humans

and the evolutionary worldview.

The classic evolutionary view is that some small mammal creature, which has been affectionately named

Schrodinger, lived over 60 million years ago and somehow survived the dinosaur extinction, which

evolutionists place about 65 million years ago.

According to them, the Schrodinger led to various evolved creatures, eventually leading to the

Australopithecines about three to four million years ago, then to Homo habilis about 2

1⁄2 million years ago, then Homo erectus, and then eventually to Homo sapiens about 200

,000 years back.

But do you notice something about the supposed progression?

In order for one type of creature to eventually progress onto the next, it had to outlive, out -eat,

out -kill, and out -survive numerous other creatures along the way.

This process ultimately makes death our creator because we're the products of a long line of

bloodshed, change, and survival to exist in our current form.

But the Bible paints a much different and better picture.

Put simply, God created a perfect world in six days that he even called very good,

and then we messed it up.

By eating the forbidden fruit and choosing to rebel against God, we brought onto ourselves and the world

the curse that God promised.

In Genesis we read, "'But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the

day that you eat of it, you shall surely die.'".

The effect of our sin can even be seen in the world today with much suffering, bloodshed, and death.

Adam and Eve were certainly not standing on an earth full of fossils killed off by carnivorous death,

disease, and suffering.

Indeed, God did not call such a world very good.

And what would be the big deal for Adam and Eve when God said death would come if they sinned, if they were

already looking around at a garden filled with death and suffering?

So we have these two really different ideas.

The first being that millions of years of death and suffering eventually progressed up to man's existence.

Or the biblical view that life started out very good and our sin led to

suffering, bloodshed, disease, and death.

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and in this way,

death came to all men because all sinned.

So should we take the Genesis account literally?

Well, if it's not literal, then Jesus somehow died for the sins of a mythical person, Adam.

No, the Bible is clear that the first man, Adam, brought sin and with it, death.

And Romans 8 even confirms that our earth groans under the weight of the sin.

So if Genesis is not real history with a real perfect garden that was wrecked by Adam and Eve, then

why would anyone need to be saved?

You can see here how the truths laid down in Genesis are fundamental to the gospel message.

Teens who blend secular science ideas and putting this over God's word as an authority for how life came to be,

start picking and choosing their own theology, their own interpretation of truth instead of trusting the

plain truth taught in the Bible.

This picking and choosing from God's word allows for morality to move from God's word into the hands of

those reading it.

Truth becomes like an a la carte menu where Christians can select which parts of God's word they wanna believe

based on what they feel fits with what's called science or culture.

Most of us are familiar with this passage where the Lord Jesus says that we should love the Lord with all of our heart, soul,

strength, and mind.

So when we come to Christ and become saved, our hearts, souls, minds, and strength

become His.

But how many youth today are living with all four of these fully engaged for the kingdom?

When it comes to our Christian experience and dedication, living fully for Christ, many youth are sold out with

their hearts and with their souls.

But when it comes to their minds, many students are not buying into the Bible and believing man's

ideas instead.

This causes a phenomenon known as cognitive dissidence when two apparent truths collide

together.

This conflict oftentimes causes youth to hold out on their commitment to their faith, making them easy targets

for the next challenge in their faith walk, college.

Next, we wanna point out a few very practical examples that defeat the idea of evolution.

We'll do this by looking at just one part of the human body, the ear.

Isn't it incredible that all seven plus billion people on earth have functionally intact identical hearing systems?

Except for, of course, some people born with defects.

If evolution was true, wouldn't you expect to see millions of people wandering around with half -created, still

-unformed hearing systems?

Now, we'll take a quick look at just how incredible this hearing system is.

In fact, the ear is so incredible that it's part of the body that God specifically points out

as marvels of his design.

To start, we'll take a look at two quick videos that demonstrate this incredible hearing system.

Ears are constantly active.

They pick up sound waves and change them into information that the brain can interpret, such as music or speech.

Sound is a pressure wave that can vibrate either quickly or slowly.

Slow vibrations produce deep sounds, while quick vibrations produce high -pitched sounds.

Sound enters the ear and is directed through the ear canal, where it first reaches the eardrum.

As the eardrum begins to vibrate, it sets the ossicular chain in motion.

The ossicular chain consists of the hammer, anvil, and the stirrup.

Sound vibrations move along the ossicular chain and into the inner ear.

Within the inner ear, the cochlea plays a central role.

It is here that the mechanical energy of sound is converted into complex electrical signals, which are

then passed on to the brain.

In simplified terms, the cochlea is a spiral -shaped tube filled with fluid.

Sensory cells, also called hair cells, line the entire length of the cochlea.

These hair cells have varying degrees of sensitivity for the detection of different tones or frequencies.

This allows the ear to perceive the entire spectrum of sound.

The change from mechanical vibration to electrical pulse is a complex process resulting from the

movement of hair cells in the cochlea.

Along the entire length of the cochlea, the hair cells are arranged like the keys of a piano.

Hair cells located at the base, or lower region of the cochlea, are responsible for high frequency,

while hair cells at the apex are responsible for the low frequencies.

As the fluid in the cochlea is set in motion, it causes a corresponding movement of the fine structures on the

surface of the hair cells to take place.

These movements cause tension differences, which produce electrical signals that are passed along the hearing

nerve to the brain.

The auditory cortex of the brain interprets this information as sound, for example, as music

or speech.

The entire chain of events, including the various steps that convert sound waves from the environment into

information that the brain can interpret, happens so fast that individuals can hear sound

both continuously and instantaneously.

This next video breaks down the chemical and electrical processes involved in our hearing systems.

The apical portion of the hair cell is bathed in high potassium solution, and the base of the hair cell

is bathed in potassium pore solution.

This establishes that potassium flow through the cell is used for both depolarization,

potassium in at the apex, and repolarization, potassium out at the base

of the hair cell.

The hair cells convert vibrations into neural impulses sent to the brain.

Your brain then interprets these nerve impulses as sound.

When taking an even closer look at the stereocilia inside the ears, scientists have found tiny molecular

linking springs called tip links that are involved in the chemical part of the hearing process by acting

to open and close tiny gates.

These tip links are so small that 530 of them could be stacked

lengthwise along the width of a single hair.

Perhaps even more incredibly, a single strand of our DNA is even smaller coming in at only

2 .5 nanometers in diameter.

Who could make such an incredible microscopic design that's created to function cooperatively

with every other part of the hearing system?

Perhaps an even more incredible part of the ear is the labyrinth, which includes three semicircular

canals that are involved in our balance system.

Each of these canals is filled with fluid.

When the moving fluid sends nerve signals to the brain, it tells which directions our heads are turned.

The posterior semicircle canal detects when the head tilts down towards the shoulder.

The superior detects when the head nods up and down in a yes motion.

And the lateral detects when the head shakes side to side in a no motion.

There's even a part of the system that has tiny microscopic ear rocks made out of calcium carbonate that are

embedded into a gelatinous membrane that can detect acceleration.

These tiny rocks act as counterbalances and move against the otolithic membrane in an amazing way.

Breaking down how the five different parts in our hearing systems work in coordination is even more incredible.

Sound waves are captured by the outer ear, which in turn wiggle three tiny bones called the hammer,

anvil, and stirrup, which press on the cochlea, turning the mechanical process into a

hydraulic one, then an electronic one, which travels through the eighth cranial nerve and then into

a chemical process in the brain where those sound waves are immediately comprehended as speech.

How could evolution design these five interconnected systems?

So, breaking this down, sound pushed the air, which is trapped in the outer ear, then

moved through a three inch pipe, which pushes an eardrum, then wiggles three tiny bones,

increasing the force by 30%, then pushes fluid inside a rolled up tube, amplifying

the signal even 22 times stronger, which opens and closes 20 ,000

trap doors based on frequency, then triggers a chemical reaction, creating

electrical charges, which are immediately interpreted as sound by the brain, then understood

as speech.

This all happens at the same time in a self -lubricated system with drainage tubes

that's perpetually self -energized.

Realistically speaking, how could something like this even evolve?

Doesn't the design explanation make much more sense?

Now, there's a lot of ideas from various evolutionists who try and explain how our complex hearing system

arose by chance mutations over supposed millions of years.

Their current explanation is that two pieces of jawbone accidentally broke off and

eventually migrated to the back of the head, then randomly assembled with nerves, chemicals, and electrical

processes to make up the complex hearing system we have today.

So next, we'll take a look at chimpanzees, which evolutionists claim as our close ancient cousins.

This short video clip reveals that chimps are just animals, animals that were specifically created to live in trees.

Notice how their feet are actually designed as hands with a thumb useful for climbing trees.

See how agile this gibbon is?

Made to live in trees, hopping from limb to limb with the dexterity of a squirrel.

Next, we'll take a look at the implications that arise if we really evolved from ape -like creatures like Lucy.

It all comes down to this.

If we evolved from ape -like creatures, then death is responsible for giving us life?

In other words, if evolution is true, we exist today because randomness was refined by murder

and selection of the fittest over millions of years and multiple creatures.

You know, it's quite ironic that schools indoctrinate youth to believe they evolved from ape -like creatures, but hold them

accountable to live under certain moral rules.

Sadly, our ministry sees a lot of Christians who, after drowning in the evolutionary teaching of public schools,

have compromised their faith in the Bible, believing that God somehow must have used evolution to

create life on Earth, and that the creation account, along with many other select places of God's word,

must just be mythical.

Next, we'll take just a few minutes to look back at the track record of human evolution teaching.

Piltdown Man was an icon of human evolution from 1912 to 1953,

over 40 years.

And over 500 books and papers were written about this icon.

Then in 1953, the truth came out that this whole thing was a fraud, being made of an ape jaw

and a human skull.

The next icon of the evolutionary lineup was Nebraska Man, who carried human evolution from 1917

to 1927, about 10 years.

This supposed ape -man transition was based upon a single tooth that was found in Nebraska, and it

had so much clout that it was even used as evidence to promote human evolution in the famous Scopes Trial.

However, more teeth were discovered in 1927, suspending the idea that it was truly an

ape -man until the 1970s, when they learned definitively that the teeth were from an

extinct pig.

And the next icon up are Neanderthals.

Neanderthals were used to promote the idea of human evolution for over 120 years, and most people

over 40 today will remember that they were widely used in textbooks as the ancient, half -ape, half

-human brutes that modern humans supposedly evolved from.

But over the last few decades, they've learned that they buried their dead, made musical instruments,

tools, cosmetics, jewelry and purses, and recent DNA findings even confirm

that they interbred with humans.

While they had some differences in size and shape compared to people today, they were most certainly

just people.

Okay, now we'll turn to see what the other side is doing with respect to promoting human evolution.

The Smithsonian recently partnered with the American Library Association to set up human evolution exhibits

in 19 libraries over a two -year period.

They're even trying to partner with churches to help them to embrace the idea of human evolution.

When partnering with clergy to embrace the idea of evolution, they mentioned that the conflict approach,

that is, biblical creation versus evolution, quote, impedes public understanding of

scientific methods and ongoing discoveries, end of quote.

But isn't it interesting how many evolutionists mix the idea of experimental science with historical science?

Experimental science is based on observations that can be repeated, tested, and evaluated, and then

used for developing medicine or putting people on the moon.

However, historical science, like evolution, cannot be observed, tested, or repeated.

In other words, isn't it ironic that evolution is just a theory that's based on untestable ideas that have never been

observed?

Now, let's turn to Lucy, the famous australopithecine that is currently the lead icon

for human evolution today.

In 1974, Donald Johanson went to Ethiopia with high hopes of finding human ancestors

and discovered Lucy just two weeks before his funding ran out.

It's interesting that he found her on November 24th, 1974, exactly

115 years after Darwin published On the Origin of Species.

Now, let's listen to what Donald Johanson thinks about God, the Bible, and the idea that God is our

creator.

Darwin, if he were alive today, would probably be very happy with this poster.

I want you to support science and reason.

So get God's name off the money that we all worship and get in

science we trust.

I don't think we'll do that, but we do need to get that name off of our

money.

There is no question.

And we have to understand that this is an exciting opportunity to be alive

and not sit around and worry about some omnipotent being keeping score to decide whether we're

gonna end up in eternal ecstasy or unending damnation.

So the problem is that people's prayers don't get answered.

Why?

Well, here it was with the New Yorker.

God finds all the prayers of mankind in his spam folder.

So we now have an explanation.

Is to reawaken, as the advert will say, a reverence.

I'll use that word.

I'll take that word.

For the natural world and our place in the natural world.

To respect the creativity of the true creator, Mother Nature.

And of course, I thought I'd show you through the great breakthroughs in science from Marie Curie to the great accelerators

and how much has been accomplished in religion.

Well, if you go to the Creation Museum, there she is.

She's a four -legged walking quadrupedal knuckle walker because of Dr.

Ham.

I don't know what he got his doctorate in, but may have been one of those things you get at Sears.

But there ain't no way that Lucy was walking on her knuckles, on four legs.

So a child goes in and sees this in a suppressed way.

The child doesn't know one way or another.

Continuing on with Dr. Johanson's famous Lucy, let's look at just how significant evolutionists

believe she is.

Here's a famous painting that you've probably seen before.

It's called The Creation of Adam.

And it was painted by Michelangelo on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in the 16th century to

glorify God as the creator of mankind.

Now I wanna draw your attention to a specific part of this painting, the very moment when God activated Adam as a

living spirit -filled being, if you will.

Now let's take a look at what Donald Johanson points out about the movie Lucy when the main star Scarlett

Johanson journeys back through time and gets to touch ancient Lucy's finger.

Following is Johanson himself narrating the significance of this special moment.

Jaxie goes back and meets her.

Very funky.

But we all know where this came from.

This image right here.

So that is more or less the story of Lucy and her discovery, her

importance.

Important role she's played in my life, of course, as an anthropologist.

Isn't it interesting how far some will go to replace God, the creator of Adam,

with an ape?

The idea presented by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel was that God should be glorified as creator.

But the idea being presented in the movie Lucy and affirmed by Johanson is that ultimately, Lucy

and other apes like her should be given credit as our creators because they survived death,

bloodshed, disease, and millions of years of survival of the fittest to eventually lead to you and me.

Replacing God's creative act with this idea is blasphemous.

Next, we'll hear a clip from Lee Berger, discoverer of the human evolutionary icon, Sadiba, when he met with

executives at National Geographic.

I was, in the late 1990s, I was privileged enough to win the first National Geographic Prize for

Research and Exploration.

When I went to receive that medal in Washington, I was hauled up into those sort of magnificent

offices up on the top floor of National Geographic, sat across from Gilbert Grosvenor, the then CEO, and

Bill Allen, powerful editor of the magazine.

And they said something I hope all of you hear sometime in your life.

They said to me, you can have anything you want, any amount of money you want to do anything you want.

Now, they, of course, meant that within some reason, I presumed, but I knew exactly what I wanted to do.

I wanted to apply technology to the search for these incredibly rare fossils

and the sites that they come from.

The fact is, we're bombarded with human evolutionary teaching.

The Croods present the idea of cavemen turning into humans.

Planet of the Apes has seven movies that present the idea that chimps can rapidly change into empathetic, smart,

human -like beings.

And the movie Lucy promotes the idea of Lucy being our ancestor, as well as the now disproven

myth that we only use 10 of our brains.

The truth is, we use 100 % of our brains, just different parts at different times.

The theories, movies, and textbooks that promote human evolution are all part of the stronghold that

keeps many people away from believing in God.

People who cannot see the obvious, plain, miraculous truth that we were created are led astray by these

ideas and remain spiritually blinded.

And isn't it ironic how our culture affirms the idea that we are evolved apes, but then holds us accountable to

live like upright spiritual beings with morals and a conscience?

This chart shows research that we recently finalized after surveying 290 students aged

14 to 24.

Students were asked the open -ended question, what is the best evidence for evolution?

And the responses were sorted into 10 different categories.

The leading response had to do with human evolution, followed by Darwin's theories, fossils,

then science as an authority.

So it's important that we focus on debunking the main pillar, human evolution.

Now we'll take a specific look at Lucy, the leading icon used in the promotion of human evolution.

We'll clearly show that she's not a human ancestor using almost entirely research that's been conducted

and published by evolutionists.

Lucy is the predominant figure used as an example of human evolution in most school textbooks,

typically starting with world history class in sixth grade.

As shown here, she's typically portrayed as walking upright, acting like a human, using tools,

and in every instance we found, she's been portrayed with wide eyes, a characteristic that no apes have

today.

We believe this is done in order to make her appear more human -like.

While the typical evolutionary story begins with the Schrodinger, the mammal from which our human line supposedly

evolved, school textbooks many times start with Lucy's kind and then go on to Homo habilis,

Homo erectus, and eventually Homo sapiens, modern humans.

While our presentation focuses mostly on Lucy's kind, the Australopithecines, it's useful to note that the

fossil collection of Homo habilis is much, much smaller than Lucy's kind.

In fact, you can fit all the Homo habilis fossils into a shoebox and still have enough room for a pair of shoes.

And Homo erectus fossils are just human remains of various shapes and sizes.

And then finally, Homo sapiens, of course, are just humans.

We want to mention that Lucy's remains were found by Johansson scattered along a hillside.

Hundreds of Lucy's bone fragments were found and later glued into 47 skeletal bones.

Most of her skull, hands, and feet were missing.

After studying Lucy for over 40 years and discovering about 20 more of her kind, there's been more

questions raised than firm answers about who she was and whether she was really the ape creature that was leading to mankind.

We'll look at 10 of Lucy's fatal flaws that proves she's not even close to being on her way to being

human.

And surprisingly, all of these flaws have been pointed out by evolutionists, not

creationists.

First, we should point out something that's not widely known about Lucy.

And it's certainly not been spotted in a sixth grade textbook that we've discovered.

Lucy was pieced together from hundreds of bone fragments that were scattered across the hillside.

And just a couple years ago, we learned that not all of her bones actually belong to her.

But more on this later.

Lucy started out as hundreds of pieces, then went to 47 skeletal bones, and then magically

turned into a human -like ape that is now prominently displayed in books and museums across the country.

Now we'll take a tour through the 10 main reasons that Lucy's not a human ancestor, starting from her

head, then down to her toes.

The skull on the top right shows a rendition of what they thought her skull looked like.

Notice that the brown parts are what they actually found.

The white parts used to fill in most of the skull are imagined.

Notice that it's sloped and ape -like, and it has the size and shape that closely resembles a bonobo.

Lucy's brain was about the same size as a chimp's brain, about 400 cc, and not even close to

a human's brain, which is about three times bigger.

Now, notice the shape of a human skull is completely different than both Lucy's and a bonobo's, with a

flat face and a jaw that does not protrude.

The foramen magnum is a hole in the bottom of the skull where the top of the spine enters.

The angle at which the spine entered the foramen magnum of Lucy's kind is nearly identical to a chimp's,

indicating that Lucy's kind walked hunched over on all fours.

Earlier in this webinar, we took a close look at these three semicircular canals deep within our ears that,

together with our minds, heads, and eyes, are involved in our balance system.

It's a highly complex system that only God could engineer.

To investigate how these semicircular canals are involved in the movement of various creatures, scientists have studied them

in depth with x -rays and measurements of their different structures.

And what they found when it comes to Australopithecines, as well as other living and non -living apes, is amazing.

This particular study, conducted by Dr. Spohr, revealed that Australopithecus semicircular canals were

best suited for facultative bipedalism, which means walking occasionally on two feet just like many

apes do today.

While this study focused on Australopithecus africanus, and Lucy's kind has been labeled as

Australopithecus afarensis, they are anatomically similar.

Further, other studies that have looked at the semicircular canals of Lucy's kind specifically have

ruled the same thing.

They were equipped for walking on all fours, and not upright like humans.

This study was completed by some of the same scientists and revealed that two of the semicircular canals, the

anterior and the posterior, were significantly different in humans than both living and extinct

apes, including Australopithecines.

These two canals also happen to be the ones that are regarded for upright walking, running, and balance.

And these two science journals confirmed that Lucy's kind specifically have the same characteristics,

that their semicircular canals are, quote, more like those of chimpanzees than of modern humans, end of

quote, providing evidence that Lucy's kind was, quote, unlikely to have been restricted to walking on

two feet, and was not as fast and agile on two legs, end of quote, as modern humans.

In 2015, international press releases started coming out showing that even after 40 years of study from hundreds of

scientists, one of Lucy's bones, a vertebra, didn't even belong to her.

In fact, it didn't even belong to Lucy's kind, but was from a theropithecus, a type of baboon.

Does that make you wonder if we're really dealing with bones from a single individual here?

Especially when Lucy was put together from hundreds of bone fragments that were found scattered along this hillside?

Next, we have Lucy's pelvis, which Johansson's team believed was broken apart and then fused together

during later fossilization, which caused it to be in an anatomically impossible position and

to flare out like a chimp's pelvis.

The solution to this problem was to use a power saw to cut it apart and then piece it back together.

After fixing the pelvis, they noticed, quote, it was a tricky job, but after taking the kink out of the

pelvis, it all fit together perfectly like a three -dimensional jigsaw puzzle.

As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing like a chimp's, but a lot like ours, end of quote.

And now we're going to watch a video about this provided by Dr. Menton at Answers in Genesis as he

discusses the clip from a PBS show.

So you get the picture?

The creatures like Lucy have the ape orientation of the iliac blades.

Now, what are the evolutionists going to do about that?

You're not going to believe this.

Nova, have you heard Nova?

There was a PBS Nova series in which Dr. Owen Lovejoy, a very distinguished, famous

paleoanthropologist, was involved, and he's looking at Lucy's skeleton here and he's lamenting the

fact that the hips are all wrong.

They're supposed to be human -like hips, so you can walk the way the Laetoli footprints showed she walked,

but they don't look like human hips, they look like ape hips.

What to do about this?

Watch, you'll get a big kick out of this.

The ape that stood up, it was a revolutionary idea.

We needed Owen Lovejoy's expertise again because the evidence wasn't quite adding up.

The knee looked human, but the shape of her hip didn't.

Superficially, her hip resembled a chimpanzee's, which meant that Lucy couldn't possibly have walked like a modern

human.

But Lovejoy noticed something odd about the way the bones had been fossilized.

When I put the two parts of the pelvis together that we had, this part of the pelvis has pressed so

hard and so completely into this one that it caused it to be broken into a series of

individual pieces which were then fused together in later fossils.

So you see they were broken and they don't fit together properly.

They did speculate in the program as to exactly who was responsible for breaking the hip,

and current scientific evidence suggests perhaps a deer stepped on it.

Here you can see a deer foot stepping on the bone.

Isn't that a bummer?

Let's see where it goes from here.

This has caused the two bones, in fact, to fit together so well that they're in an anatomically impossible

position.

The perfect fit was an illusion that made Lucy's hip bones seem to flare out like a chimp's.

But all was not lost.

This is a power saw, friends.

You may want to put your goggles on.

Lovejoy decided he could restore the pelvis to its natural shape.

He didn't want to tamper with the original, so he made a copy in plaster.

Notice he's removing whole parts, not just cutting.

He cut the damaged pieces out and put them back together the way they were before Lucy died.

It was a tricky job, but after taking the kink out of the pelvis, it all fit together perfectly,

like a three -dimensional jigsaw puzzle.

Look how perfect.

You can read a newspaper through the hole.

As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing like a chimp's, but a lot like ours.

This is what we call science.

You can teach this in the public schools, but you can't criticize it, because if you do, that would be religious.

Even secular scientists who hold to the evolutionary position have problems with Lucy's pelvis,

stating, quote, we think that the reconstruction overestimates the width of this pelvis area, creating a

very human -like sacral plane.

And another, quote, the fact that the anterior portion of the iliac blade that faces laterally in humans but

not in chimpanzees is obvious.

The March resemblance of AL -288 -1, which is Lucy, to the chimpanzee is

equally obvious, end of quote.

We find it amazing that these remarks, even from evolutionary scientists, are never found in public school textbooks.

Next, we want to point out that even secular scientists can't seem to agree on basic things like Lucy's gender.

Coming out with articles labeled Lucy or Brucie and Lucy or Lucifer.

Very ironic.

Next, we'll take an in -depth look at Lucy's wrists, which are very much like modern apes and designed to lock in place for

knuckle -walking.

Authors Richman and Strait were interviewed about their article published in Nature, and they stated, quote, it suddenly

occurred to me that paleoanthropologists had never looked at the wrists of Lucy or any other important early human

ancestors discovered since the papers were published, end of quote.

So while they were visiting the Smithsonian, they went to the Cass Collection, inspected Lucy's radius,

that's her forearm bone, and found that she had the, quote, classic knuckle -walking feature, end of quote.

This became obvious when they, quote, saw a ridge of bone on a lower forearm that prevented Lucy's wrist,

like that of a chimpanzee or gorilla, from rocking backwards, but allowed it to lock in an upright

position for easy knuckle -walking, end of quote.

The study conducted by Richman and Strait revealed that Lucy had the same concaved arm bone that joined with her

convex wrist, creating a locking system that allowed for both swinging and stable knuckle -walking.

The characteristics of Lucy's wrist grouped well with chimps and gorillas and came in completely

separate from humans.

Now, let's take a close -up view from that study.

The arm bone on the far left is from Lucy, the one in the middle is from a chimp, and the one on the

far right is human.

Notice how Lucy's bone is identical with the chimp's.

They both have the concave shape that allows the wrist to lock into place for knuckle -walking.

Humans don't have any angle for this whatsoever.

Now it's time to take a look at the fingers of Lucy.

When statistically compared to chimps, bonobos, and humans, the fingers of Lucy's kind were curved

and designed for swinging in trees.

This study grouped the fingers right next to the chimps and bonobos and far away from human fingers, which

aren't curved.

Again, Lucy had curved fingers and locking wrists for knuckle -walking, just like chimps do

today.

Now on to Lucy's legs, which some scientists argue were much too short for upright walking.

Some say she walked with a bent -hip, bent -knee method.

Some say she might have shuffled.

Some say she walked on all fours.

And some say she was bipedal.

Do we really know?

Do they even really know?

You would think that if her anatomy was most certainly designed for walking, as some evolutionists would say, that her

semicircular canals, skull, wrists, and legs would not point to her walking on all fours.

And now, let's take a look at Lucy's knee.

In the BBC video referenced here, by the way, you can watch it for yourself, Donald Johanson says,

"...her knee and her ankle were also preserved.

And we know that from the detailed anatomy of both of these areas, those anatomical regions, that they were certainly

commensurate with upright walking.".

Well, okay, let's take a look at this claim.

As you saw, the BBC video shows a complete knee joint with both the lower and upper legs joining

together as if they were ready to be walked on.

But this is not actually what they found with Lucy, as can be shown here with her fossil labeled AL

-288 -1.

Notice that they have an upper and a lower leg bone, but from different sides of the body.

The complete knee joint that is shown in this video cannot be Lucy's.

Perhaps they're referring to a different knee bone that Johanson believes is from Lucy's kind, but was found

one year earlier and 8 ,000 feet away.

As we'll see, National Geographic presents this knee bone shown as AL -129

-1 to be Lucy's.

Like we mentioned, AL -129 -1 was actually found by Johanson one

year before he found Lucy, and it was found over 8 ,000 feet away from where she was found and over

200 feet deeper in the strata.

It's interesting that when Johanson first showed this knee to one of his lead team members who was a world authority on local

motion, he said this knee was.

Quote,.

End of quote.

Even so, it's been frequently referred to as Lucy's knee, as we'll see next.

How do we know that this upper and lower leg bone fit together, given that they were found 50 feet apart?

Even Johanson admitted this was speculative.

Here's how National Geographic shows specimen AL -129, even referring to it as Lucy's

knee five different times.

Wow, that's quite a reach.

Two parts of a knee joint are found 50 feet apart and they're put together and said to be from the same species of a creature

found 8 ,000 feet away and 200 feet deeper?

And now, we'll take a look at the extent of the fossil record of Lucy's kind.

In the same BBC video we watched just a few moments ago, Johanson states,.

Quote,.

This statement, combined with the fact that the video shows an army of hundreds of Australopithecines marching

across the screen, would lead the viewer to believe that the ground is filled with these creatures.

Well, at least 400 specimens of them as shown walking across the screen.

But is this what the fossil record shows?

While Johanson states, we now have 400 specimens and the video represents these as an army

of complete skeletons walking across the landscape, what they actually mean by 400 specimens is

400 small pieces of bone as shown here on this table which is reportedly the

entire Hadar fossil collection.

So rather than having an army of Lucy's kind, they barely have enough to fill a picnic table.

Next, we'll take a quick look at a comprehensive study that was done in 2009 that was completed to summarize

the 30 -year history of discovery, analysis, and interpretation of Lucy's kind.

The study will also serve to contrast the actual collection of fossils rather than the hundreds of complete

skeletons that were marching across the landscape in the BBC video.

The study actually reports that fewer than 400 specimens of Lucy's kind have been found and that over 30

of the entire collection are just teeth.

They have fewer than 6 skulls in this collection and the skull that is reportedly in the best shape, AL444

-2, is actually smashed to pieces and had to be glued together with many significant parts still

missing as seen here beside a complete chimp skull.

Now we move on to the most recent news about Lucy.

Just this year, the University of Texas had a team of orthopedic surgeons evaluate the numerous compression

and green stick fractures in Lucy's skeleton.

This team determined that she most likely died while falling 40 feet out of a tree, traveling 35 miles per

hour, and was conscious when she reached the ground because of the way she tried to break her fall.

Even the lead study scientist, John Kappelman, remarks,.

Quote,.

It is ironic that the fossil at the center of a debate about the role of arborealism, living in trees, in

human evolution, likely died from injuries suffered from a fall out of a tree, end of quote.

Yes, it is quite ironic that Lucy, the supposed human ancestor who walked on two feet, died

while falling 40 feet out of a tree.

But they've even offered a rescuing device, stating that,.

Quote,.

Because Lucy was both terrestrial and arboreal, features that permitted her to move more efficiently on the ground

may have compromised her ability to climb trees, predisposing her species to more frequent falls, end

of quote.

In other words, to save the embarrassment of the bipedal ape dying by falling out of a tree, they believe she must have fallen out of

a tree because she wasn't used to living in them anymore.

Wow, that's quite a reach for a creature that supposedly lived over 3 million years ago.

Here's a video simulation developed by the team of scientists who investigated Lucy's fall.

Notice the eight different sets of fractures that indicate death by falling.

Now we'll attempt to quickly summarize the main reasons we believe that Lucy is not our bipedal walking human

ancestor.

First, her skull is sloped and ape -like, just like a modern chimp.

And her spine entered her skull at an angle, convenient for walking on all fours as shown in this Lucy replica at the

Answers in Genesis Museum.

Also, studies conducted on Lucy's kind show that the semicircular canal systems were very similar

to chimps, indicating that they were designed for walking on all fours.

The posterior and anterior canals of humans are statistically significantly different in many ways when

compared to both living chimps and extinct apes like Lucy's kind.

The fact that one of Lucy's key spinal vertebra didn't even belong to Lucy and the fact that this has evaded hundreds of

scientists for over 40 years concerns us.

Are there any other parts that don't belong to Lucy?

How do they know all of her parts, which they pieced together from hundreds of fragments, really belong to her?

We reviewed that even the scientists who believe in evolution have a difficult time with Lucy's pelvis, which was found

broken in pieces, fossilized abnormally, sawn apart, and then pieced back together.

What conclusions can be drawn with certainty about such an important piece of evidence?

Should Lucy's name really be Brucie or Lucifer as these scientists have suggested?

It seems like understanding her gender would be quite fundamental.

Lucy's wrist is quite telling.

The concave shape of her arm bone is clear evidence that she was designed like a chimp and had a wrist joint

that could lock into place for knuckle walking.

The shape of this area is completely different in humans.

The fact that the fingers from Lucy's kind are curved and ape -like is also very telling.

Such fingers would have been useful for living in trees and they are very different from the fingers that humans have.

We'll probably never know how Lucy really walked, although the evidence sure seems clear from her head to her feet that

she walked on all fours and lived in trees.

Experts are all over the map on her locomotion.

Some say she shuffled, others say she was bipedal, and still some say she walked with a bent hip bent

knee method.

And the knee joint shown in the BBC video was not from Lucy's actual skeleton, as they didn't find upper

and lower parts from each leg.

And certainly the knee referred to as Lucy's knee did not belong to her, but was found over 8 ,000 feet away

and 200 feet lower in the strata.

We also find the blatant exaggeration of the fossils representing Lucy's kind to be troubling.

We're not quite sure how the producers of that video could show an army of hundreds of complete skeletons

walking across the screen and refer to them as 400 specimens knowing that the actual record is

just 400 bone fragments.

And this is produced by objective scientists?

We believe that anyone watching that video and hearing the narrative would be misled.

We've looked at dozens of pictures and museum replicas from Lucy around the world and literally every

single one shows her with eye whites, a feature that only humans have and no apes.

Do you think this was done to make her look more human -like?

Further, she is shown in some places with bare skin like humans and in poses contemplating deep thought

like humans might do.

Even a famous French scientific magazine accepted the truth that Lucy is not our ancestor and published it

under the headline Goodbye Lucy in its February 1999 issue.

In 1984, Oxnard stated in his book, The Order of Man quote, the Australopithecines known over

the last few decades from Olduvai and Sturkvolding and Makapansgat are now

irrevocably removed from a place in the evolution of human bipedalism possibly from a place in any group

of any closer to humans than the African apes and certainly from a place in the direct human lineage

end of quote.

Dr. Sully Zuckerman for many years the head of the Department of Anatomy at the University of Birmingham in England and

a scientific adviser to the highest level of the British government said of the Australopithecus that quote,

they are just apes end of quote.

Zuckerman studied the fossils of this creature for 15 years in minute detail with a team of scientists.

Thank you for watching our Lucy video today.

We'd like to offer your student a free student guide and DVD.

If you have a student between 10 and 24 years old please order this free set by going to our

website debunkevolution .com and clicking on the offer at the top of the page.

Thank you for joining us.