Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#346098 - 08/14/08 10:54 AM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: reprobate]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
That has always been my understanding too, Reprobate. Humans are apes, just like the great apes, and the common ancestor was an ape of some kind.

The all-too-common misconception that I always have to refute, however, is that humankind evolved from the current-day great apes.

So, it's important to make that distinction.

Oh, and to add to Bill's list of common creationist arguments:
"What about the eye, smart guy?" and "What about the flagella, huh, huh, huh?"

Makes me want to flagellate them.


Edited by TrojZyr (08/14/08 10:55 AM)
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#346145 - 08/14/08 02:31 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: TrojZyr]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
Quote:
So, it's important to make that distinction.

Why? How important is it, really?

I mean, sure, the common ancestor wasn't a chimp — but we have a common ancestor with chimps that was a hell of a lot like a chimp in pretty much every important way.

Overly subtle distinctions are lost on people who don't have a science background.
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#346151 - 08/14/08 03:23 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: LordofDarkness]
Dan_Dread Offline


Registered: 10/08/03
Posts: 523
Loc: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Quote:

In the first video of my post, Charlton Heston stated that nobody knows for sure where we came from. This gives all theories an equal validity as Darwin's theory.

Hmm

Do you actually believe this?

Do you not feel that such things as facts,evidence, and subsequent research may play even a small part in elevating one 'theory' above another?

What context are you are using the word 'theory' in? When you say theory do you mean 'guess', as the creationists tend to use it, or do you mean 'hypothesis firmly grounded in factual interpretations of evidence', as the scientific community does?
_________________________
"One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike and yet it is the most precious thing we have." - Albert Einstein --------------------

Top
#346152 - 08/14/08 03:27 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: TrojZyr]
Dan_Dread Offline


Registered: 10/08/03
Posts: 523
Loc: Vancouver, BC, Canada
LoL

Pointing out the many variations of independently evolved light sensing mechanisms generally shuts their yaps, if only for a second.

And ireducable complexity falls apart under any sort of scrutiny. Behe ftl
_________________________
"One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike and yet it is the most precious thing we have." - Albert Einstein --------------------

Top
#346156 - 08/14/08 03:58 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: reprobate]
Chess Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 09/09/02
Posts: 1473
Loc: Chicago, IL USA
Quote:
I mean, sure, the common ancestor wasn't a chimp — but we have a common ancestor with chimps that was a hell of a lot like a chimp in pretty much every important way.

Overly subtle distinctions are lost on people who don't have a science background.


Your cousin is not the same person as your grandmother.* Even if your cousin happens to look more like dear old Grandma than you do.

That's an important distinction, and I fail to see how it's "overly subtle".

-Chess

* Note: this statement may not apply to residents of Alabama.

Top
#346163 - 08/14/08 05:02 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: Chess]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
My point is, what people have to come to grips with is that we evolved from an ape that was so much like a chimp, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if one plopped down in front of you right now.

Saying "man did not evolve from chimps" is technically true but seems to concede something to the enemy that you aren't actually conceding.


Edited by reprobate (08/14/08 05:03 PM)
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#346164 - 08/14/08 05:03 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: Dan_Dread]
LordofDarkness Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 12/23/06
Posts: 760
Loc: Tennessee, U.S.
I mean by hypothesis.
_________________________

"Any group or collective, large or small, is only a number of individuals. A group can have no rights other than the rights of its individual members." - Ayn Rand

"Laws are there for a reason. You may not agree with them but you gotta obey them. Nobody wants to be in court." - Sonic the Hedgehog

"Satanism is not a white light religion; it is a religion of the flesh, the mundane, the carnal - all of which are ruled by Satan, the personification of the Left Hand Path." - Magus LaVey

"Test Everything, Believe Nothing." -

Top
#346182 - 08/14/08 06:11 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: Dan_Dread]
LordofDarkness Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 12/23/06
Posts: 760
Loc: Tennessee, U.S.
Quote:

What context are you are using the word 'theory' in? When you say theory do you mean 'guess', as the creationists tend to use it, or do you mean 'hypothesis firmly grounded in factual interpretations of evidence', as the scientific community does?


You mean a hypothesis upgraded based on successful tests to scientific theory? Yes, I mean that exact context. Like I said before, I do not believe in anything without proof.
_________________________

"Any group or collective, large or small, is only a number of individuals. A group can have no rights other than the rights of its individual members." - Ayn Rand

"Laws are there for a reason. You may not agree with them but you gotta obey them. Nobody wants to be in court." - Sonic the Hedgehog

"Satanism is not a white light religion; it is a religion of the flesh, the mundane, the carnal - all of which are ruled by Satan, the personification of the Left Hand Path." - Magus LaVey

"Test Everything, Believe Nothing." -

Top
#346185 - 08/14/08 06:34 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: reprobate]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
The difference between chimpish-but-not-chimp and bonafide-chimp is pretty important, actually. Maybe not genetically, but certainly, conceptually and chronologically.

When people start spreading the stupid lie that humans evolved from pan troglodytes, or worse, that evolutionary theory claims that we evolved from them, a huge can of stupid worms gets opened.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#346186 - 08/14/08 06:34 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: LordofDarkness]
barrytheblade Offline
Banned Douche

Registered: 07/12/08
Posts: 48
Loc: WA
Just as a side-note, has anybody ever heard of the Stoned Ape Theory? It basically suggests that after the dinosaurs were extinct the ape-like animals came down from the trees and found that mushrooms grew out of cows' (I use cows loosely, as I'm not sure what type of cows lived then) excrement. They ate these and it made the brain grow rapidly since the mushrooms were hallucinogenic and the mind had to expand in order to try to take in and understand what was happening to it.

Joe Rogan is a big supporter of this theory. He's a comic and a brilliant guy. He's really into the mind-expanding aspect of drug use. (Of course, I know of the CoS policy concerning drug use and I have never even tried the lighter side of them, so don't panic.)

It's an interesting theory since science has had a hard time explaining the rapid brain growth that led up to the human brain.

Top
#346194 - 08/14/08 07:20 PM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: TrojZyr]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
I don't understand why you think it's important.

Creationists don't care about the difference. Any argument that is meant to point out that man didn't evolve from pan trog. is a red herring. Their resistance stems from an unwillingness to accept that man could evolve from ANY ape, and what ape in particular evolutionists claim man comes from is quite irrelevant to them.

It's important to make the distinction when you're clarifying the evolutionist position vs. creationist obfuscation, for people who are actually interested in the mechanism, but as far as capturing the popular imagination goes, as far as goes the job of reconciling people to the fact that man evolved from less intelligent apes, then the distinction is not especially helpful and threatens to be distracting.

An educated lay person can understand when a scientist says, "Man evolved from apes. Our ancestors were creatures much like this chimp. This chimp is like a distant cousin; if you were to trace our respective family trees backward for millions of years, you would reach creatures that, to any casual observer, would have been indistinguishable from a chimp."

What an educated lay person is less likely to understand, is when a scientist says, "Man did not evolve from apes. He evolved from ape-like creatures that were not apes. The apes evolved from the same ape-like creatures." That is overly complicated and doesn't clarify the situation at all.


Edited by reprobate (08/14/08 07:22 PM)
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#346247 - 08/15/08 12:57 AM Re: Crazy or not? [Re: barrytheblade]
Chess Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 09/09/02
Posts: 1473
Loc: Chicago, IL USA
Quote:
Just as a side-note, has anybody ever heard of the Stoned Ape Theory? It basically suggests that after the dinosaurs were extinct the ape-like animals came down from the trees and found that mushrooms grew out of cows' (I use cows loosely, as I'm not sure what type of cows lived then) excrement. They ate these and it made the brain grow rapidly since the mushrooms were hallucinogenic and the mind had to expand in order to try to take in and understand what was happening to it.


I haven't heard of this particular idea before, but from your explanation it sounds downright Lamarckian. Rats' tails will not grow shorter in each succeeding generation if you slice them off, and hominids' brains will not totally expand, man if you feed them psilocybins.

-Chess

Top
#346279 - 08/15/08 08:42 AM Re: Credibility of man's evolution [Re: Linguascelesta]
Zardex Offline


Registered: 03/12/08
Posts: 310
Originally Posted By: Linguascelesta
Originally Posted By: DanielleAlicia
Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact.

Well, technically it is a theory.

Say that to someone with AIDS.

Evolution happens in real time and is 100% provable, there is no need to call it a theory.

Also yes we are "apes", and so was the ancestor of us and chimps.
Just like someone already said it was an ape rather like the chimp, indeed something you probably would mistake for a chimp if you would see it.

And to whoever suggested our brains grew with mushrooms or whatever. Nice imagination game but there are multiple very solid theories about why our brains evolved if you care to study.

Most likely the most significant reasons for bigger brains have to do with a pressing need for unlimitedly better social skills for the need for advanced social structure that came about with two main reasons:

1.
Need to adapt to hunting meet and developing an energy conserving food culture with social aspects and more specialized tasks.

2.
The invention of systematically using weapons for hunting and for power (throwing weapons especially, like rocks) made social status more important then pure strength as a value in hierarchy, because now two weak individuals could easily overpower one strong individual.
The more easily we can hurt each other, the more need we have to feel we care about each other and have friends on our side.

It seems the more violent we were the smarter we were, that could be one of the reasons why Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons had more brain capacity then the modern human does, perhaps once we refined a superior ability to speak it became less necessary to be so violent, and perhaps a more specialized brains eventually shrank slightly, apparently something about lacking speech required more brain capacity, hard to say, but our brain has shrank none the less.

Cro-Magnons on the other hand probably had some form of speech, and they survived while Neanderthals with bigger muscles, better evolved hips for walking, bigger brains but no good voice box, died. It's likely they couldn't compete with hunting tactics, and some early form of warfare may have a role too.
_________________________
"Art is not merely an imitation of the reality of nature, but in truth a metaphysical supplement to the reality of nature, placed alongside thereof for its conquest."
Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#346281 - 08/15/08 08:46 AM One good reason to call it a "theory". [Re: Zardex]
Linguascelesta Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 11/01/05
Posts: 2352
Loc: Europa
Originally Posted By: Zardex
Originally Posted By: Linguascelesta
Originally Posted By: DanielleAlicia
Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact.

Well, technically it is a theory.

Say that to someone with AIDS.

Evolution happens in real time and is 100% provable, there is no need to call it a theory.


It is a theory. By definition. Whatever you might think, and whatever you might like to think, it is a theory. Don't blame me. I didn't make the word mean what it does wink That's just reality.

Oh, and I'd happily say that evolution is a theory to someone who has AIDS, if it were the slightest bit relevant in the conversation (unlike them having AIDS, which I don't see as relevant to whether or not evolution is a theory).

Top
#346282 - 08/15/08 08:59 AM Re: One good reason to call it a "theory". [Re: Linguascelesta]
Zardex Offline


Registered: 03/12/08
Posts: 310
Originally Posted By: Linguascelesta

It is a theory. By definition. Whatever you might think, and whatever you might like to think, it is a theory. Don't blame me. I didn't make the word mean what it does wink That's just reality.

Oh, and I'd happily say that evolution is a theory to someone who has AIDS, if it were the slightest bit relevant in the conversation (unlike them having AIDS, which I don't see as relevant to whether or not evolution is a theory).

The precise form that evolution by natural selection of all life from earliest forms over the course of about 4 billion years has taken is a theory backed by facts.
Among those facts is the fact of evolution of species by natural selection that we can see in every single cell of our bodies.

The reason I mentioned AIDS is because the AIDS virus can evolve within minutes so that it is unrecognizable as the same virus.
In fact if it wasn't for the fact of evolution AIDS would not be a problem at all, so for someone with AIDS, saying evolution is a theory is like saying their illness is a theory and not a fact.
_________________________
"Art is not merely an imitation of the reality of nature, but in truth a metaphysical supplement to the reality of nature, placed alongside thereof for its conquest."
Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >


Forum Stats
12279 Members
73 Forums
43879 Topics
404435 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements