And that would be just as much of a fossil as "Lucy" was. From my readings it appears that they are finding actual bone fragments and not traditional fossils where most of the original material is replaced.<quoted text>
Fossil being the word I used not a fresh one. Also prehuman the "evolution" stage before modern man the "missing link" .
The bones they found of Lucy were only about 40% of the skeleton. Of course they have found quite a few others and some lone bones were able to be categorized by the finding of Lucy.
Between all of the fossils they now have a very good picture of what Australopithcus afarensis looked like.
So, if Lucy was just a pile of bones what is the difference between her and the fresh remains we could dig up today, except for a matter of time and evolution?