The idea that evolution is a linear progression from "ape to angel" is flawed, argues Guy P. Harrison. Five decades after the discovery of Lucy, the fossil of one of the most ancient hominids ever discovered, why should we still be studying her? Lucy offers invaluable insights into our origins, highlighting Africa's central role and showing that bipedalism preceded brain expansion, reminding us that humanity is not the pinnacle of evolutionary progress.
Five decades after the 1974 discovery of Lucy, the most famous fossils of all time, it is fair to ask, So what? Why should anyone still care? Hasn’t she been scrutinized, popularized, and mythologized enough? What’s left beyond scientific minutiae and fodder for academic journals? There have been remarkable achievements in many fields of science since that November day when paleoanthropologist Donald Johanson spotted a three-million-year-old right ulna (lower-arm bone) that had been exposed by erosion in Ethiopia’s Afar region. Moreover, with climate change, biodiversity loss, nuclear-war risk, and the possible emergence of an artificial superintelligence, don’t we have more pressing concerns? What can the stone echoes of one long-dead Australopithecus afarensis possibly tell us that holds any relevance today? Plenty, it turns out.
Join the conversation