Can't Believe in Human Evolution From Chimps

According to some researchers all of the things the other species do dont prove their sentient.

I think self-awareness is enough to prove to be sentient. You don't build nuclear reactors on instinct.

Some birds show intelligence, problem solving skills, planning and tool use, but they are restricted in what they can do because of their physiology.

A magpie passed the mirror test ... which is how they determined apes and dolphins to be self-aware.

They stuck a yellow dot on the magpie's head, and when they put a mirror next to it, the magpie observed the mirror, shaked it's head, looked back at the mirror and saw it was still there, then it scratched it's head off the floor and used it's legs to remove it.

Anyway, after he's recovered, he's back to normal, jumping around, begging for a walk. It's as if nothing happened. He's completely forgotten this life threatening event that occurred moments ago.

Dogs and cats have lifelong memory

I'm dead serious, I know a lot of atheists out there are looking for a true purpose to life, and I pray they find it.

It's quite sad that you need to believe in some ancient mythology destined for poor people of the time to find your purpose in life

Heronumber0

Every one of your objections to evolution (from chimps or otherwise) has been expressed hundreds of times already by various creationists, and all have been resoundingly refuted. If you had read the literature, you would know this. And you have read the literature -- that's obvious from your responses to what others have posted -- so it's clear you're not here to learn better.

So are you just here to peddle the old creationism farrago, then? To stir the pot, épater les infidèles and maybe convert a few people who haven't learnt the truth yet? If so, your effusions may have had the exact opposite effect -- because they have prompted a deluge of explanation and setting-right from educated ATSers that will be read and can be understood by others in search of the truth. So instead of spreading the god virus to more other unfortunates, you've actually helped inoculate more people against it.

Well done, my friend. It's always nice to see someone so committed to the battle against ignorance and superstition.

Astaniyix, I have to disagree. I am for ID, not Creationsism. Yes I propably did want to stir things up as hundreds have done before, but I am not here to convert. I am here to learn - as are we all.

I have already modified my views on the Einstein ape and have learned about the aquatic ape theory - a beautiful fairy tale. However, I have yet to read one single scientifically backed view on how one organ can slowly mutate into another by virtue of accumulated gradual mutation.

Also I am yet to be convinced that HUMAN consciousness and HUMAN language were accidental events through mutation (I agree that animals have memory and sentience but not RECURSIVE THOUGHT - someone please address this point!). In fact I am so concerned that I am about to open a new thread about these two critical issues.

In fact, if anything, my views on ID have been altered but still remain strong.

At least I am having a reasoned argument with intelligent individuals, not atheistic extremists like Dawkins.

Heronumber0, I would love to see scientific evidence for an organ popping into existance by the will of God, or any evidence that support's ID as a whole

Your the one that believes in extraordinary claims, you have to prove them.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by DarkSide]

Darkside, that is not the way Science works - as you know. A scientific theory needs refutation and hypothesis modification by the hypothetico-deductive method which constitutes most of contemporary science. It is the job of people who believe in God to refute the evolution hypotheses and for scientists to provide the proof. However, when we are looking back to millions of years ago BOTH sides have a problem don't they? so my theories and yours are equally valid.

Why not address my new thread which came up from this discussion. NO_ONE answered this problem with relevance to HUMANS Darkside not animals!

Originally posted by Heronumber0
Darkside, that is not the way Science works - as you know. A scientific theory needs refutation and hypothesis modification by the hypothetico-deductive method which constitutes most of contemporary science.

Indeed, but these things are disputed by scientists with different opinions, not scientists and creationnists.

It is the job of people who believe in God to refute the evolution hypotheses and for scientists to provide the proof.

As I said, the world has yet to see evidence for ID or creationism. There is plenty for evolution however. The only thing i've seen IDers do is play with probabilities, and arguments from ignorance. And when they do come up with a hypothesis, they are proven wrong, over and over again.

However, when we are looking back to millions of years ago BOTH sides have a problem don't they? so my theories and yours are equally valid.

Sorry we don't know everything that happened in the last millions of years, however when we come across something we don't understand we don't give and say "God did it". Do you see how ridiculous that is?

[edit on 7-5-2007 by DarkSide]

Originally posted by DarkSide
Sorry we don't know everything that happened in the last millions of years, however when we come across something we don't understand we don't give and say "God did it". Do you see how ridiculous that is?

I agree. It's no different than believing that lightning comes from Zeus throwing thunderbolts from Mount Olympus. Or Poseidon creating tidal waves to punish sailors.

If you can explain to me how it's different, I'm all ears

And for the record Intelligent Design IS creationism, wrapped in a pseudo-scientific suit. Still creationism, still garbage, still superstition.

Without putting religion into it, could ID and evolution coexist. When I say ID, I don't mean an old man with a white beard. Maybe single celled life was an accident, but when they work together in a complex organism such as the human body, I find it hard not to see intelligent design. The intelligence behind it is anyones guess.

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Without putting religion into it, could ID and evolution coexist. When I say ID, I don't mean an old man with a white beard. Maybe single celled life was an accident, but when they work together in a complex organism such as the human body, I find it hard not to see intelligent design. The intelligence behind it is anyones guess.

That's one of my favorite old lines.

"I believe in god, but not some old guy with a beard sitting in a throne" It almost comes with a "duh" at the end, but not quite.

That combined with the classic "Maybe God created us using evolution".

Simply put, saying that there was an intelligence to the design of life without any evidence is a leap of faith. There's no science behind it. It's exactly the same as saying that the earth quakes because it's on the back of an angry elephant.

Just because someone doesn't fully understand something is no reason to jump to the conclusion that God did it. It's an intellectual cop-out. It's an insult to humanity, and to oneself. It's saying that I as an individual can never know, so I won't ever try. It's like a child giving up on an elementary school math test because it's too hard.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Without putting religion into it, could ID and evolution coexist. When I say ID, I don't mean an old man with a white beard. Maybe single celled life was an accident, but when they work together in a complex organism such as the human body, I find it hard not to see intelligent design. The intelligence behind it is anyones guess.

That's one of my favorite old lines.

"I believe in god, but not some old guy with a beard sitting in a throne" It almost comes with a "duh" at the end, but not quite.

That combined with the classic "Maybe God created us using evolution".

Simply put, saying that there was an intelligence to the design of life without any evidence is a leap of faith. There's no science behind it. It's exactly the same as saying that the earth quakes because it's on the back of an angry elephant.

Just because someone doesn't fully understand something is no reason to jump to the conclusion that God did it. It's an intellectual cop-out. It's an insult to humanity, and to oneself. It's saying that I as an individual can never know, so I won't ever try. It's like a child giving up on an elementary school math test because it's too hard.

Wait, I'm not giving up. What I am saying is not divine creation in 6 days, but when I look at the biomechanics of the body and the brain I find it amazing. It’s the most complex, well built, and efficient machine ever made. I'm not saying an omnipresent god made everything. What I'm getting at is that even if the single cells were created by accident, they had some intelligence to design and build complex multi-celled organisms. Therefore we are the products of intelligent design.

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
Wait, I'm not giving up. What I am saying is not divine creation in 6 days, but when I look at the biomechanics of the body and the brain I find it amazing. It’s the most complex, well built, and efficient machine ever made. I'm not saying an omnipresent god made everything. What I'm getting at is that even if the single cells were created by accident, they had some intelligence to design and build complex multi-celled organisms. Therefore we are the products of intelligent design.

micro organisms do not have any kind of intelligence. They don't do anything by choice, they just are. we can be described as colonies of micro organisms, but we weren't designed. These cells just found an advantage in forming pluricellular organisms.

Originally posted by thehumbleone

Originally posted by melatonin
Did you bother reading what Darwin wrote following your out-of-context quote?

What you did is present a blatent quote-mine. An common act of creationist intellectual dishonesty.

It doesn't matter,

Well yes it does. You posted false and missleading information [against ATS guidelines] and tried to pass it off as fact. You were called on it.. but instead of taking responsibilty you started insulting people:

but what really matters is that you know your purpose before you pass into the next life, and I pray eI'm dead serious, I know a lot of atheists out there are looking for a true purpose to life, and I pray they find it.

For someone who has no problem peddling the lies of creationalist conspirators [in a forum thats against them ].. you sure have alot of stones to throw. Glass houses.

Case in point, your "scientific theories" of life's origins are pointless and are not needed.

Maybe you should tell admin that. This is peticular forum is called Origins & Creationism Conspiracy. If you do not believe you can benefit from such discussion.. perhaps you should find one that does not threaten your beliefs with scary science. You can say evolution is bull all you want but wishful thinking is not going to change the facts.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by riley]

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
What I'm getting at is that even if the single cells were created by accident, they had some intelligence to design and build complex multi-celled organisms. Therefore we are the products of intelligent design.

Why? I don't understand why you assume intelligence is necessary for our current state. Is it because we are complex? Just because something is complex doesn't mean it was built through intelligence.

That's it im going to devote the rest of my life to trying to build a time machine so i can go back in time to different stages in history and see how humans evolved into what we are today therefore solving this God Dam argument once and for all!

I also had another thought if the human race survives long enough to evolve further into another form they will probably be having the same arguments about how they evolved from us!

About hight in evolution. Humans and chimps have the same basic sized torso and arms. the difference in in our legs. Humans started out with short legs too and for good reasons. We grew them longer it is believed to move from one patch of habital land to the other which could be some distance away. Being out in the open like that can be dangerous. We as a species had more endurance and literally outwalked our predators whos packs were a few miles a way. We never hung around long enough due to our more terrestrial mobility needs and so legs stayed on the course of developing longer.

CHimps need to get food and to escape predators by going up in the trees frequently. large body mass having huge legs will get you killed. The ripe fruit is at the top of the tree. If they cant distribute their weight evenly across a few branches they'll snap and chimp goes tumbling to his death on the forest floor with other predatory animals. We didn't have so many trees so we grew legs to move quicker out in the open terrain. Saved us from famine and from stalking predators who couldn't keep up with our constant walking.

As a by product of our evolution we don't have claws good for climbing we did away with them by developing simple cuticle nails and by developing opposable digits so we could grasp tree branches better. To redistribute our weight better. Monkeys have claws and some have nails. Apes have no claws and unlike monkeys have more mobile shoulder sockets. Again to redistribute their body wieght better on smaller more brittle limbs. Notice lions and tigers although great climbers can't climb up as high into the brittle upper part of the taller trees where the prey hide. Claws and poor shoulder mobility don't allow for them to go onto more than one branch at a time and that branch better hold thier weight.

Some scientists believe that humans developed colored sight way back when we were monkeys or lesser evolved apes to spot ripe and unripe fruit way up in them trees.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by AMANNAMEDQUEST
What I'm getting at is that even if the single cells were created by accident, they had some intelligence to design and build complex multi-celled organisms. Therefore we are the products of intelligent design.

Why? I don't understand why you assume intelligence is necessary for our current state. Is it because we are complex? Just because something is complex doesn't mean it was built through intelligence.

I was not assuming anything. I was just offering a scenario. I cannot think of the vocabulary to explain what I'm trying to say. But whats your 2 cents on the whole topic? Or do you post here to say your always right and I am wrong?

Here is a good article on the aquatic ape theory:

www.greeneggzine.com...

Rasobasi, I like the idea of humans learning to hold their breath as part of the start of learning language.
And I agree with the question, why does there have to be intelligence involved in creation? Although I do believe Mother Nature has her own special kind of intelligence.

DNA functions as the carrier of the informational instructions (much like letters in writing) for specifying the building of all the structures in living things, as well as the functions they carry out. Although the parts of DNA and proteins bond together using perfectly normal chemical laws and forces, there are no known laws or properties of chemistry or physics which could probably (without intelligent intervention) initially dictate, determine or produce the sequential order of the nucleotides which build functional DNA / RNA, nor produce the sequential order of the amino acids to build a functional class of proteins ---in fact, it is the capacity of the building blocks of DNA and protein to occur in virtually any conceivable order, which makes them useful for building DNA and protein. --In short: There is nothing known in the physics or chemistry of matter which could initially produce the FCS information in DNA, RNA or proteins.

Of course not!!! We were engineered