I agree with your eclipse rating, but I would bump Ardi to perhaps a 7 or 8. Their margin of error is likely something near 200,000 to 400,000 years. I didn't state the margin of errors they gave in any formal paper issued by the team.Helio, interesting methodology in post #24, avoiding the potential that the ancient solar eclipse date and history is better established and better dates than Lucy and Ardi. On a scale of 0 to 10, 10 being the highest confidence for a fact, 0 being the lowest confidence level, what number do you assign Lucy and Arid as the dates and the claim they are your ancestor and what number do you assign for the solar eclipse record redated? I place the solar eclipse event at 9 or 10, Lucy and Ardi at 5 or below.
I don't know enough about dating methods to give you a better guess. Anything that is in the millions of years in age will come with a significant margin of error, no doubt. I doubt any eclipse a million years ago would be even close to a 3 on your scale.
When it comes to our physical origins (not spiritual) then the order is more important than the exact age. Ardi's claim for being human and pre-dating Lucy, met with huge resistance (initially), but this was partly due to animosity towards Tim White, the team leader, who was very protective of Ardi.
The reconstruction of Ardi, along with the science, took the team about 15 years or more. This is a bit much but not all that unusual. The bones are like powder and require special efforts to remove the rock they are often encased within, for example