The quote had nothing to do with the original you are posting about
The quote is from a letter from Gee to NCSE about the use of the original quote.
Would you like to correct Gee on this one too?
"To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story - amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific."
Henry Gee, In Search of Time: Beyond the Fossil Record ato a New History of Life, New York, The Free Press, 1999 page 126-127.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
It is interesting to see that you are still trying to misuse the Gee quote to support your position.
We talked about the Gee quote earlier. He was offended by the Discovery Institute dishonestly cherry picking his work to try to deny evolution. Gee accepts evolution and common descent. His statement says nothing opposing a common ancestor between humans and Australopithecus aferensis.
As I indicated in the last post and earlier ones on this subject, the consensus has been for some time that A. aferensis is not a direct ancestor. That does not refute that Lucy is a transitional species. It simply means that aferensis was not directly in the line of human ancestory.
Other fossils are indeed closer and are considered more likely to be ancestoral.