Re: LUCY: ``Yes, we have no bananas!"
Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:46:06 GMT (Ed Conrad) wrote:

>Newsgroup question:

>> Is Lucy a Monkey?

>Damn right it is!
>``Lucy" is nothing more than a member of the ``monkey" family,
>with no connection -- none whatsoever -- to early man.

>The dreamers and hallucinators who led the ``expeditionary" team
>are well aware of the fraud they had attempted to perpetrate by
>claiming it to be a missing link.

>Fact is, the few bits and pieces of what they called ``Lucy" -- to go
>with the vast majority of manmade bonelike additions that were used to
>fill the many gaps -- weren't even found in close proximity.

>Truth is, ``Lucy" is a mosaic of a few bones that were found over a
>square mile.

>To put it rather bluntly, ``Lucy" is a mockery of scientific
>integrity (if some still exits in the field of physical anthropology,
>which I sort of doubt)).

Uhm, am I on candid camera? oh...why did they let Mr. Ed out of
retirement? He is a talking HORSE for goodness sakes. Damned Nick at