Do you view a Species such as Humans as Humans, Intelligent Monkeys or Just Monkeys??

reply to post by trueperspective


Actually, DNA tests show huge comparisons between monkeys and humans.

That's why I say, Monkeys actually are ancient humans, who have been genetically changed by God.

Monkey are cursed humans.

Look up where the term monkeys came from.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by 911stinks]

Technically, humans are great apes, not monkeys. As a general rule to follow, monkeys have tails, apes don't.

The creationist types who make the comparisons of humans to monkeys have flawed premises and such a premise is a good indicator that said creationist needs further education about evolutionary theory.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Technically, humans are great apes, not monkeys. As a general rule to follow, monkeys have tails, apes don't.

The creationist types who make the comparisons of humans to monkeys have flawed premises and such a premise is a good indicator that said creationist needs further education about evolutionary theory.

Yes, maybe I need further indoctrination, to accept you agenda that there is no God. Guess what?

To believe there is no God, is to admit God exist. Talk about an oxyMoron.

Interesting post as I was mulling almost the same thought yesterday.. I consider humans to be mammals, not smart monkeys... all species are connected genetically somehow.. .. LOL funny thought for creationist.. if god made adam and eve then the population would be filled with incestous relationships...

While it's accepted that we (homo sapiens) have shared a common ancestor with monkeys, it's important to realise how genetically different we are - and how genetically different monkeys can be.

The definition of species is to do with reproduction. That is, if two individuals can successfully mate and produce offspring that can also successfully reproduce they are then of the same species. In some rare cases animals of different species can reproduce but their offspring are invariably sterile - a good example of this is a Mule (donkey + horse = sterile mule).

While all humans are of the same species and can therefore successfully pro-create, this is not the same with monkeys of which there are many, many different species, as different from each other as we are from them.

To then suggest that we are the same as them, or even that closely related is a bit of a mis-conception.

An interesting outcome of research into this showed a troop of say 5000 monkeys having a greater genetic diversity between them than the whole of the human species!

Having said all that, and at the risk of undermining everything i've just said, i personally see humans as 'just' another animal - not any 'better', nor any 'worse' than any other creature and another mutually-reliant cog in the massive machine known as an ecosystem.

Originally posted by 911stinks

Yes, maybe I need further indoctrination, to accept you agenda that there is no God. Guess what?

I have no agenda. Your education, or lack thereof, is your business.

To believe there is no God, is to admit God exist. Talk about an oxyMoron.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Working on your education would be in your best interest.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by traditionaldrummer]

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
Just a question for all who are not afraid to answer. Me I view humanity as humanity lol, what about you?



[edit on 5/14/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

Your question seems to ask are humans more then we observe? That is do humans alone have a soal? IMO, no. I think all life beyond a certain level of sophistication does as well. I exclude primitive life like bacteria which I view as living machines. Were not the ones who only use tools, crows will modify things they find and use them as tools. The major aspect I think that may be unique is how much our individual identity is tied in so deeply with our ability to think abstractly about time. It's rare when were so engrossed in something, were not thinking about whats going to happen in a minute or a lifetime. With that we can affect the present, and influence the future.

reply to post by 911stinks

To believe there is no God, is to admit God exist. Talk about an oxyMoron.

So, utilising your logic, that means because I don't believe Santa Claus exists, that means he actually does? Do you preach your faith in public? If yes, do you do it behind chicken wire?

What diferentiates us from our simian cousins is the fact that something triggered the evolutionary capability of a disparate grouping of apes.

Whether that may be the direct intervention of a divine creator, or the gentle prodding of the neccesity for change, I just don't know. Either way, to me, it suggests that we were never meant to stay the same. And that fact - if true - is seriously interesting.

Originally posted by Beamish
reply to post by 911stinks

 

To believe there is no God, is to admit God exist. Talk about an oxyMoron.

So, utilising your logic, that means because I don't believe Santa Claus exists, that means he actually does? Do you preach your faith in public? If yes, do you do it behind chicken wire?

What diferentiates us from our simian cousins is the fact that something triggered the evolutionary capability of a disparate grouping of apes.

Whether that may be the direct intervention of a divine creator, or the gentle prodding of the neccesity for change, I just don't know. Either way, to me, it suggests that we were never meant to stay the same. And that fact - if true - is seriously interesting.

I feel you, I wonder if an incomming asteriod or comet or other had encountered the APES WITH RADIOACTIVE FORM OF ENERGY AND CHANGED THEM WOULD THIS BE considered DIVINE INTERVENTION OR SCIENCE OR BOTH??

This also goes for other potentials, LOL

[edit on 5/14/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

reply to post by Beamish


If Santa had inspired a book that has been around for centuries, called the Bible, I would say yes.

Santa is a pagan symbol created by the anti-God clan to take away the importance of Christmas and the birth of Jesus, and to push people toward materialism.

The concept of Santa is very real. That Santa doesn't really exist, doesn't make it any less important to kids all over the planet. A powerful symbol indeed, and not one that is taken lightly.

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by Beamish
reply to post by 911stinks

 

I feel you, I wonder if an incomming asteriod or comet or other had encountered the APES WITH RADIOACTIVE FORM OF ENERGY AND CHANGED THEM WOULD THIS BE considered DIVINE INTERVENTION OR SCIENCE OR BOTH??

This also goes for other potentials, LOL

[edit on 5/14/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

Everything that happens in this universe, is divine in nature, as we are gods in training. That's why we are modeled after God himself. He is creating people (gods) who are worthy to inherit the Universe. That's why it has taken 6000+ yrs to train us. You fail, you get put back into a body to try again. You fail bad enough, you are taken out of the system, and put into Hell (holding cell) until judgement day. Those souls judged not worthy to carry on, are eliminated, erased, ceased to exist. Those that succeed, go on for cosmic training by none other than Jesus himself, the same lamb that offered himself as a sacrifice in place of Abrahams son.

Monkey?

I don't have a tail. I'll go with being an APE though!

Originally posted by 911stinks
reply to post by Beamish

 

If Santa had inspired a book that has been around for centuries, called the Bible, I would say yes.

Santa is a pagan symbol created by the anti-God clan to take away the importance of Christmas and the birth of Jesus, and to push people toward materialism.

The concept of Santa is very real. That Santa doesn't really exist, doesn't make it any less important to kids all over the planet. A powerful symbol indeed, and not one that is taken lightly.

That was not my main point, but I mentioned different peoples belief in a soal because thats what A LOT of people think is different between us and other animals. I diden't want this topic to revolve around a fight of "my god is bigger then your god" IMO it makes NO difference, one way or the other. I was looking at animal and human behaviour, and why and how each does what it does.

If you don't want to participate in an intelligent discussion, take your comedy act to Vegas. Just don't quit your day job.

Humans are to monkeys as dogs are to weasels.

And no, I don't think of my border collie as an intelligent weasel

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Technically, humans are great apes, not monkeys. As a general rule to follow, monkeys have tails, apes don't.

The creationist types who make the comparisons of humans to monkeys have flawed premises and such a premise is a good indicator that said creationist needs further education about evolutionary theory.

Correct. Humans are one species of the 5 Great Apes. Calling humans "monkeys" is a bit of an insult considering our taxonomic status.

Again thank you all for your inputs. Sometimes I see folks post on ATS calling humans monkeys as if its a form of degrading and wanted to see why humans were some many times refered in this way.. I still dont see the mean comments posted so this must be a good group participating within this discussion..

The theory about the APES does interest me though!

[edit on 5/14/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

Humans seem to me like a cross between pigs and apes.

Some people are more pig like, while others are more ape like. Personally, I'm more of an ape than pig.

reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed


Interesting..Would that view be a way you view different races as well, from different genetic make up modifications?
2nd

Originally posted by JohnnyTHSeed
Humans seem to me like a cross between pigs and apes.

Some people are more pig like, while others are more ape like. Personally, I'm more of an ape than pig.

Oddly enough,
I've heard it said that certain cultures that have practiced cannibalism refer to human meat as "long pork".

Finally I've put that useless triva to use.

I think we are or at least can be quite clever but only occasionally, sporadically, in individuals do we even begin to show intelligence.

Intelligence, i would roughly define as the ability to act in a strategically effective fashion. This requires keeping the big picture & how the likely consequences of one's actions upon that big picture in mind when deciding when, where, if & how to act.

It is our stupid assumption that we supposedly 'are' intelligent which means we don't even work at it so we almost never are.

We have the worst kind of shallow, brainless, myopic egotism. Immediate, shrill gratification & clueless about there even being a future to consider.

Cleverness without actual global, big frame of reference applied intelligence is very likely going to be the cause of our own self inflicted extinction.