No Intelligence in evolutionary branches?

originally posted by: NoConspiracy
a reply to: turbonium1

So we didn't evolve at all?
We were never barbaric and rude runing around half naked hunting and gathering, then became cultural and civilized. We just poped into existence as the culture we are now.

That explains alot

I'm concerned about the people who think we can't evolve, what if one does evolve would he have to burn on the stacks like all the heretics that proved Christian "science" wrong?

If God made everything as it is why is there still change?

Sincerely NC

That is not 'evolving', into different species, which I'm referring to in my post, if you look at what I said.

You're referring to cultural development, advanced societies, as being an 'evolution' of the human species, which is not what I'm talking about at all.

What you mean to say is that humans have become more advanced, more civilized, etc. while other species have not.

And you wonder why that is, right?

Humans have the intelligence to advance, to create things, to learn everything about the world, and so forth, while other species lack the intelligence to advance in some way, to develop societies, create things, etc.


Simple as that.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: NoConspiracy
a reply to: turbonium1

So we didn't evolve at all?
We were never barbaric and rude runing around half naked hunting and gathering, then became cultural and civilized. We just poped into existence as the culture we are now.

That explains alot

I'm concerned about the people who think we can't evolve, what if one does evolve would he have to burn on the stacks like all the heretics that proved Christian "science" wrong?

If God made everything as it is why is there still change?

Sincerely NC

That is not 'evolving', into different species, which I'm referring to in my post, if you look at what I said.

You're referring to cultural development, advanced societies, as being an 'evolution' of the human species, which is not what I'm talking about at all.

What you mean to say is that humans have become more advanced, more civilized, etc. while other species have not.

And you wonder why that is, right?

Humans have the intelligence to advance, to create things, to learn everything about the world, and so forth, while other species lack the intelligence to advance in some way, to develop societies, create things, etc.


Simple as that.

This is called the Dunning Kruger Effect. The belief that nothing can be cleverer than you because you are so dumb you cannot imagine anything else. [Not you personally - 'one']

Your statements are just not true. There are animals that have better societies and incredible abilities to build whole cities that are by far surpassing our square blocks. Ants and termites come to mind immediately. We could not build what they do, it's more than amazing how they include airing, heat, safety and even farming of both fungi and other species.

You could say of course it's all a program. But then I say, that is the same case in humans, only much clumsier.
All ants and termites can build like that but most humans couldn't build a city like this if they tried, let alone a decent house.

You say we have technology etc. Sure, a handful of very intelligent humans have come up with this, not a sofa dweller or 95% of human kind. Can you make a computer from scratch on your own?

All that is different with humans is that we were so weak and vulnerable that we needed to become 'makers'. Thus we evolved in that direction. If we didn't need this and we'd live just fine and safe, we wouldn't have needed to 'invent' speech or make anything. Sharks don't need houses, therefore it never happened.

That doesn't make sharks less intelligent. The Dunning Kruger Effect strikes again when humans say that no other animal is as intelligent as we are. Oh man [facepalm]. You are measuring against us as the standard, other species are nothing like us. Of course other animals won't be exactly the same.
That doesn't mean the relative intelligence is less.
In the same way that if I measure our echo location ability against bats, for whom it is normal, we'd fail miserably.
Intelligence doesn't equal: Behave like a human. That is the dumbest thing ever. Just because animals don't behave exactly like us doesn't mean they are not intelligent. They can be highly intelligent but we wouldn't know because we are so dumb we expect intelligence to look exactly like our intelligence. LOL.

If you ask me, there are absolutely animals who if we could relatively measure it [i.e translate animal intelligence and human intelligence into a neutral measure that can then be compared], that would surpass many humans. Shockingly so.

Really, do you think just because we have opera and paintings and literature that this means intelligence? It means we do that stuff but nobody else is interested as they might have completely different 'art'.
Of course ants don't paint...or do they?

If you think hard, you might realise that they could have an equivalent that looks nothing like our art. It could be scents inside the burrow, arranged in a way that is pleasing and awe inspiring to ants. And so on. But even without art ants and termites seem pretty well versed in maths and architecture, society building, agriculture and warfare.
And now I am trying for you to find something they do that you recognise as human, which isn't really necessary.

What you really wanted to ask is, 'are there any other animals that are like humans. Ape shaped and awkward mouth noises making, tool makers?
Well no, unless they are human.

You need to realise that our culture with colours and music isn't really that special to others. It seems amazing to us but really, nobody else cares.

Animals that I have seen trying to communicate with us and copying us knowingly [something we are really bad at the other way round], include dolphins, octopi, dogs and many others. Now that is intelligence right there. But they have different bodies, different needs and interests and hence can't turn completely human just for us.

In short:

Yes, many, many evolutionary branches have been as viable as humans. Especially certain dinosaurs who roamed the earth for much longer. No they didn't do human things but they were and are and can be highly intelligent within nature, sometimes even more than the naked ape called human.

To understand this you have to be clever though.

originally posted by: NoConspiracy
a reply to: turbonium1

So we didn't evolve at all?
We were never barbaric and rude runing around half naked hunting and gathering, then became cultural and civilized. We just poped into existence as the culture we are now.

That explains alot

I'm concerned about the people who think we can't evolve, what if one does evolve would he have to burn on the stacks like all the heretics that proved Christian "science" wrong?

If God made everything as it is why is there still change?

Sincerely NC

An orangutan never turned into a chimpanzee. A chimpanzee didn't turn into a man. ALL LIFE ON THIS PLANET HAS A COMMON ANCESTOR. Would someone please pay attention for a change and stop listening to the idiots like Turbo# and Cooperstupid.

Thank you.

Whales and dolphins are very intelligent.
Substitute those flippers for hands with opposable thumbs...and look out.

originally posted by: NoConspiracy

After all the fishes are around for a long long long time, compared to mammals,

Maybe mudskippers laugh at us because we can only breathe out of water in our natural state whereby they can breathe even when on land.

(slinks back into the depths)

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Whales and dolphins are very intelligent.
Substitute those flippers for hands with opposable thumbs...and look out.

They'd still need umbrellas so they don't drown in a rainstorm.

I remember a short science fiction story I read once. In it a group of humans were studying this enormous ancient life form floating in space. While inside of it, one of the humans got trapped by the alien creature that linked to his brain to figure out what was trespassing around inside of it. That caused the alien to activate it's dormant intelligence to communicate with the humans inside of it. It told the humans that it rarely used it's capacity for intelligent thought because it did nothing for survival and was considered by the alien to be counter productive to that end.

So, is it "smart" to rely on instincts or intellect? Is it a better survival strategy to have tried and true instinct rule over intelligent thought? Our intelligence and curiosity may be more of a problem creator than a problem solver where survival of the human species is concerned.

originally posted by: Phantom423
An orangutan never turned into a chimpanzee. A chimpanzee didn't turn into a man. ALL LIFE ON THIS PLANET HAS A COMMON ANCESTOR. Would someone please pay attention for a change and stop listening to the idiots like Turbo# and Cooperstupid.

Thank you.

You have no evidence to support your claim.

Millions of species on Earth have never 'evolved', or indicated any such thing, in thousands of years.

That's a quadrillion examples of proof, while you have nothing but worthless claims, in return.

Solid evidence is here, the actual species on Earth, today, and thousands of years ago, being the same species throughout.

You don't seem to realize that, but look around, it's obvious to see, and that's the reality here.

a reply to: turbonium1

All creatures are unchanged...

Yet when we study the DNA of say bacteria that can resist drugs/compounds we create to destroy them they've genetically changed from the "original" strain of bacteria that would normally die off our treatments. What's that called?

Then there's horizontal gene transfer where a completely different species can spread genetic information to another, that's DNA from one species finding it's way into the genetic code of another. What's that called?

I can find plenty of other examples of what eludes to evolution whether it be human manipulation, natural contamination, changes through off spring or just study the simplest forms of life.

Because DNA can create a wide variety of outcomes but when it comes to the most basic forms of evolution, singular cells to multicellular lifeforms, the chemicals they used and the various groups of life it's created. We find that we can trace groups to a common ancestral trait. The way they evolved.

I'm in no way an expert in this, I'm not an expert in creationism either but it's clear to me that one is trying too hard to be right whilst the other field can stumble upon evidence all day that supports it's theory. Science is actively creating useful techniques and technology that benefit mankind and other species.

What's the idea that the earth is 6000 years old doing for people? Well? They're not exactly evolving with the times are they?

a reply to: turbonium1

If one parent is lactose intolerant does that mean their kids will be too?

If not why not?

Could it be that tolerance to lactose after infancy and the ability to drink lactose from other species is a mutation? Is it possible that in the creation of a human being that genetic trait can be passed on?

Isn't that... Hmmm, yeah that sounds like a change alright, I'm sure there's a word for genetic change in animals that happen to be fortuitous.

No animal matches our intelligence because we are the material manifestation of the Originating Creative Spirit. All animals and so on are extensions of this Spirit. All parasitic and malevolent creatures are adversarial to the Creative Spirit, so they have rightfully been named 'Beelzebub', which means lord of insects/filth.

originally posted by: NoConspiracy
a reply to: turbonium1

So we didn't evolve at all?
We were never barbaric and rude runing around half naked hunting and gathering, then became cultural and civilized. We just poped into existence as the culture we are now.

Our history is written in multiple cultures. Cain was the agrarian, whereas Abel was a nomadic herdsman. God endorsed the way of Abel because it was the natural way of humanity (i.e. Abraham, Moses, Native Americans and teepees).

Seth was likely following in Abel's footsteps. The Hebrews saw Seth as a nomadic follower of God, and Cain as the stubborn founder of early agrarian civilization and cities. The Egyptians saw it the other way around, they saw Set (Seth) as a chaotic wanderer who was defying all the man-made progress of his brother who was the king of Egypt. The Egyptians even called Set's father "Atum" (Adam), who was the father of all living.



From the way I see it, early humans after the creation were very much in touch with the originating Creative Spirit that made them. So much so that they were capable of miraculous feats, such as the immense longevity described in Genesis and the Sumerian Kings List, and were also deified by their ancestors. The fall of humankind eventually degressed humanity into a more depraved state.

If God made everything as it is why is there still change?

a reply to: RAY1990

Organisms can adapt, but they cannot go outside particular genetic bounds. Adaptation is not evolution because it works with facets already present in the genome. Take for example antibiotic resistance. A Microbe adapts to higher levels of antibiotics by increasing the number of detoxification pumps via turning up particular genes in the genetic code. The microbe isn't evolving, it is simply using preset mechanisms that allow it to adapt to toxic environments. Definitive proof this is not evolution comes from the fact that antibiotic resistance is quickly reversible, showing that indeed there is no permanent mutative evolutionary change taking place.

Source

Along the lines you are asking, I have pondered the possibility of animal species being endowed with individuals who are so gifted so as to be be called Genius, As were several people in our past.... ie. Hawking, Einstein, Newton and the like.

Could an animal exist with self awareness and increased capacity for thought and intelligence comparable to, or exceeding man ? And if so how would we accept such an anomaly ?

a reply to: cooperton

I'm not talking about adaptation I'm talking about cross contamination of DNA/RNA in single celled organisms such as bacteria. DNA/RNA can be used by different organisms because it's literally the universal code of life.

Virus can alter the DNA of a bacteria when it infects them, look up bacteriophages.

I like the old stories but to me they are stories. They've got similarities due to having a common verbal lineage. From what I've studied this is a good theory as to why Nordic culture has cultural ties with god's that came from the steppes, probably from India. Even their origin stories have similarities.

Interestingly their culture had a war of the pantheons where the old god's Æsir were fighting the newer god's (introduced) the Vanir. Eventually they became one pantheon.

Seems to me the adoption of foreign culture is a natural evolution of humans regarding spiritualism and religion, Christianity adopted foreign practices, it literally is the culmination of what came before.

I prefer the Nordic stories though... A lot less muddling of waters despite us knowing very little about them!

a reply to: Plotus

My mom's dog knows I hate spiders and kill them on sight... She kept jumping off her bed but standing on it and not letting me at it, she was protecting a woodlouse spider from me.

A few weeks before a spider was running around the floor and she saw me kill it. She acted strange then but I didn't realize why.

That's a level of compassion I've never seen in an animal, she was smart enough to hide it from me and even went through what seems to be a few bites to protect her little friend.

Strange story I know. Einsteins brain wasn't exactly remarkable in physical terms as I remember. Experience helps make us intelligent. Seemingly my mom's dog developed a respect for life. Most dogs would eat a spider.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: cooperton

I'm not talking about adaptation I'm talking about cross contamination of DNA/RNA in single celled organisms such as bacteria. DNA/RNA can be used by different organisms because it's literally the universal code of life.

Virus can alter the DNA of a bacteria when it infects them, look up bacteriophages.

Yeah but that's not evolution. The viruses are inserting a gene that causes the host to create more protein capsids of that virus.

I like the old stories

What is most profound is that all cultures seem to have a different perspective on the same historical event. It confirms they are not just copy and pasting another culture's history, but instead have their own opinions about the actual events that occurred.

The native fauna wasn't smart/developed enough for slavery. We are now.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Wales and dolphins are mammals,

But that's still pretty much where I was trying to go with this OP...

So let's say the fishes evolved to the point where they had all the capacities we as humans have, they could even have more capacities(breathing under water).
What if they managed genetic modification, and they would really like to go on land.
I was thinking maybe these legends of the gods making us in their image, isn't as far out(aliens), as some suggest, but much more earthly.
What if they were just another evolutionary branch that made it all the way, invented us, and might still live among us, maybe they were different in the beginning, but whose to say they could not mate with us, I mean the angels were rumored to have done that. By now They would be indistinguishable.

Same could go with birds, or reptiles.

It's just a very odd thought that I had recently.

Sorry I didn't want to stir the pot that much.

Sincerely NC

a reply to: NoConspiracy

Octopus which is a form of cephalopod, which is definitely not a mammal and is very intelligent and amazing problem solvers and tool users. Unfortunately they lack the life span and social grouping to take full advantage of this intelligence.

Crows and Ravens and several breeds of Parrots are excellent tool users. Crows have even been observed learning how to make and use tools from previous generations and improving upon these tools and then passing on this knowledge to the next generation which is likewise capable of the same. Birds are not mammals. This recent discovery of passed on and improved tool use throughout generations in my mind makes these birds closer to us than any other animal. These animal have the life span, social grouping, and intelligence to compete with us quite successfully if given enough time to develop as they are well on their way to all that makes us the successes we are.

Our ability to educate and improve upon our past especially with tools is kind of what used to define us, now that it's clear that's no longer unique...

That's two branches that aren't mammals right there with the closest to being our equals in the animal kingdom being a bird rather than a mammal.

By the way, don't piss of crows and ravens, they have long memories and several have learned many ways to get revenge, a recent one being stealing the caps off the air valves and flying away with them to deflate tires.

a reply to: Puppylove

as you see in my post above I dared to even go a step furter.

Sheldrakes morphogenetic field, is interesting in this aspect, because it could mean that each branch, has the same amount of evolution going on, from very primitive to very compex.

maybe the octopus and the parrot are just lesser evolved species from their respective morphogenetic field, like a chimpanse is to humans.

considering that mammals are the youngest branch, it would not surprise me that humans are the least evolved from all the inteligent beings around.

where are they?
could they have evolved past the meatsuit?
could they be the sources of legends around angels and demons?
what about the stories of the beings coming out of water having very human attributes?

and if No to all the above.
why did evolution only evolve mammals to the sophistication we see today in humans. and not the other branches like fishes, reptiles and birds?

sincerely NC

a reply to: NoConspiracy

I'm a fan of animal intelligence and the studies thereof. I'd rather stick to more grounded studies and observations from which real results and observations can be made than go into what is clearly woo.

If you want to know why I think it seems we're ahead of the race, well adaptations take many forms, intelligence, especially advanced intelligence is complex and requires a lot of energy. The reason few creatures take the path to intelligence is that need for greater energy is a big trade off in comparison to other easier paths.

Take crows for example, a favorite of mine, obviously. They are scavengers and opportunists, their entire way of gaining food is based upon opportunism and manipulation of others and their environment to do the work for them. With the advancement of man, and our manipulation of the environment, we've added puzzles and challenges to their world. Due to how they approach problems, these two things combine to advance their intelligence. Crows have adapted amazingly to even our most urban areas.

I believe that the first spark of advanced intelligence is rare, many other paths are easier. Advanced brains are energy hogs. It's quite possible that before us, no other life advanced this far intellectually, or in many cases did so differently and lacked the physical tools to do what we do, like hands. Take Orca's for example, super smart, but they have no ability to build tools, whereas crows and ravens have adapted well to using their beak and talons to manipulate objects and their environment.

I don't believe everything is advancing on a set course, not all things are created equal, and some branches are failures or will be. Is why extinctions happen in the first place. On top of all this, natural disasters or ecological changes often act as a reset towards life's advancements.

There are many paths besides intelligence and no objective proof of the woo you're peddling.