In 1974, a discovery was made that dramatically popularized the issue of human evolution. In Hadar, Ethiopia, Dr. Donald Johanson unearthed a strange primate skeleton. Although it would be four years before was declared a new species, "A.L 288-1" -- better known as "Lucy" -- soon became a cultural icon. Johanson had been searching for Lucy or something like her for almost a year when the skeleton came to light. In 1973, he and another paleontologist had found a knee joint they could not classify washed out of a river in Hadar. Suspecting that other members of the same species were buried in the area, Johanson began to dig. Lucy was the result.

Several things struck Johanson about his find. First, it appeared to be of the same species as tappeared to be of the same species as the 1973 knee joint. Second, the remains were clearly female. Finally -- and this is by far Johanson's most important had walked upright.

As soon as the news hit the presses, Lucy became a superstar. Creationists quickly declared that Lucy was not a hominid, but only an ape. Allegations were made that Johanson had tampered with the evidence in order to become famous. Evolutionists argued that Lucy was a perfect example of a "transitional hominid", closely related to both humans and an ancient, undiscovered ancestor of boths humans and modern apes.

What Was Lucy? More than two decades after her discovery, debate still smoulders over Lucy's identity. Was Australopithecus afarensis truly an ancestral human? Or were they merely apes, now long extinct? Although Lucy is by far the best-known example of Australopithecus afarensis, about 300 separate individuals have been found since 1973. Using argon-argon dating and other techniques rejected by Creationists as inaccurate, Evolutionists have determined ages of between 3 and 4 million years for Australopithecus afarensis remains. The Lucy specimen herself has been dated at 3.2 million years. Creationists say these methods are arbitrary and wrong. Evolutionists maintain they are accurate. (NOTE: the creationist article cited discusses only Carbon-14 dating, and not any modern methods of dating. If any reader is aware of a stable site addressing these issues, please mail me.)

Modern opinions about Australopithecus afarensis vary. Evolutionists now speculate that Lucy and her species were ancient relatives of modern humans, although not necessarily direct ancestors. According to the evolutionary perspective, Lucy could be considered a sort of "great-aunt" rather than a "great-grandmother" to modern humanity. Evolutionists point to anatomical evidence in the afarensids that indicates Lucy's species was capable of walking upright in a manner unlike any modern apes. Evolutionists view this as the first step towards full humanity.

Creationists, on the other hand, believe Lucy has been misinterpreted. They insist that Lucy was just another ape, and that her species was almost identical to the chimpanzees of today. Although they agree that Lucy may have walked upright now and then, they point out that modern chimpanzees are also capable of an occasional upright stroll. Creationists emphasize the ape-like features of Australopithecus afarensis. They feel there is little or no evidence that the species was a product of evolution.

What is the truth about Lucy? That is for you to decide. The Lucy Test was developed as a springboard for people interested in the topic of human evolution. I hope you will pursue this topic further and research it to your heart's content. Take The Lucy Test. Your results may surprise you.