Human Ancestor or Human during Flood?

Isn't There a Geological Column in Laetoli, and Aren't the Footprints Proof of Human Ancestors? · Human Ancestor or Human during Flood? · These Footprints Look Human to Me?

Ancient human ancestor was one tall dude, his footprints say
on mail dot com
https://www.mail.com/int/scitech/news/4831810-ancient-human-ancestor-was-tall-dude-footprints.html

I'll only quote the bold text:

NEW YORK (AP) — He stood a majestic 5-foot-5, weighed around 100 pounds and maybe had a harem. That's what scientists figure from the footprints he left behind some 3.7 million year ago. He's evidently the tallest known member of the prehuman species best known for the fossil skeleton nicknamed "Lucy," reaching a stature no other member of our family tree matched for another 1.5 million years, the researchers say.

I checked the rest of the article and so no reference to any Australopithecus Afarensis bones.

Especially none with human type feet (Lucy is footless! See here:)

Par 120 — own picture worked with photoshop, CC BY 2.5, Lien

So, the clearly human footprints (not sure I can afford to show picture yet, will be added if possible, see link) could have not been from a relative of Lucy?

Yes, if and only if:

• men existed back when this is from, and not meaning Australopithecines;
• this was so recent that one cannot reasonably say "Australopithecines wre the only men back then".

This means, it is feasible if both Lucy and these footprints are from diverse kinds back at the time of Noah's Flood.

If from the same kind - then you reconstruct the Lucy skeleton as having human feet. If from diverse kinds 3.7 million years ago, you ask the question why no human skeleta are found for another 1.5 million years.

So, if you want to say, as I do, Lucy was an ape, the footprints are from a man, you have to skip the millions of years. I do so too.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Octave of Immaculate
Conception of the BVM
15.XII.2016