10 Apr 11
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' between animals and humans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
10 Apr 11
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwWhy are there no 'species' between animals and humans?
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
Looks like we killed them all, killing is what we do best.
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by josephwWhy is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale?
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
Depends on how you measure ahead. Consider this -
Are you as strong as a gorilla?
Is your eyesight as good as a hawks?
Can you smell as good as a dog?
Can you run as fast as a cheetah?
Can you swim as fast as a sailfish?
Can you fly as fast as a peregrine falcon?
Why are there no 'species' between animals and humans?
They're all dead. Homo neanderthalensis, would be our closest living relative except they died out 30,000yrs ago. Genetic evidence suggests they live on in the human genome.
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by josephwThe difference between you and the great apes is not as much as you seem to think it is.
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
10 Apr 11
3 edits
Originally posted by josephw“....Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? ...”
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
we are not “ further ahead” because many other animals are just as 'evolved' if not more 'evolved' (if your criteria of 'how evolved' we are is the number of significant mutations that we evolved to have. If that is not your criteria for defining the “ evolutionary scale” then what is it? ) as we are -just not with the same great mental advantageous ( our physical advantageous are laughable ) ) .
“...Why are there no 'species' between animals and humans? ...”
what do you mean by “between” in the above? Using the meaning of the word “between” you are using above, would a chimpanzee be “between” a rabbit and a human?
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonChristians frequently seem to have the curious notion that a "between" species would be something like a satyr - half man and half goat.
“....Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? ...”
we are not “ further ahead” because many other animals are just as 'evolved' if not more 'evolved' (if your criteria of 'how evolved' we are is the number of significant mutations that we evolved to have. If that is not your criteria for defining the “ evolutionary ...[text shortened]... ord “between” you are using above, would a chimpanzee be “between” a rabbit and a human?
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by Proper Knob"Are you as strong as a gorilla?
[b]Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale?
Depends on how you measure ahead. Consider this -
Are you as strong as a gorilla?
Is your eyesight as good as a hawks?
Can you smell as good as a dog?
Can you run as fast as a cheetah?
Can you swim as fast as a sailfish?
Can you fly as fast as a peregrine falcon? ...[text shortened]... cept they died out 30,000yrs ago. Genetic evidence suggests they live on in the human genome.[/b]
Is your eyesight as good as a hawks?
Can you smell as good as a dog?
Can you run as fast as a cheetah?
Can you swim as fast as a sailfish?
Can you fly as fast as a peregrine falcon?"
I measure 'ahead' by the fact that through intellect humans are far superior in every way.
Fragments of bones does not evidence make. I know you don't believe it, but it's pure speculative fabrication, and unreliable testing at best by any scientific means, that anything human existed more than ten thousand years ago.
In fact, the evidence that is ignored is the evidence for the sudden emergence of man.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by josephwOne of the earmarks of a good debater is knowing the arguments that will be made by your opponent. So, what do you think your respondents will say? Please DO hold back from making them look and sound as stupid as you can.
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
I do this sometimes and it often results in my cancelling my post.
10 Apr 11
Originally posted by josephwHere's an interesting fact for you JW. Detailed brain studies of humans (and their skulls) from the past few tens of thousands of years show that the human brain is getting smaller.
I have a question.
It seems that by casual observation one notices a vast disparity between the human species and all other life forms.(Please don't try to tell me that its all relative) There is the microscopic, to vegetative, to animal, to human.
Why is the human species so much further ahead on the evolutionary scale? Why are there no 'species' betw ...[text shortened]... mans?
Please don't hold back on trying to make me look and sound as stupid as you can. 😲
That's right - assuming that the brain's size is some measure of our intellect - it seems that over time we're all getting dumber. How can that be you ask? (Well checking out the reducing quality of posts on this forum might be evidence enough.)
Think about how our species works today.
How many people do you know that can build a car, or a TV, or a computer? And I'm not talking about building a kit with a few pre-made components - but building one from scratch.
I don't know about you, but I can't think of anyone. Certainly not I.
So, how is it that we are smart and can actually build cars and TVs and computers?
We pool our talents, we record our efforts, we learn, we teach our children - basically we have culture.
Anyway, back to you post - further ahead? That's meaningless in evolutionary terms - there is no further ahead, there's just what works. We work. The dinosaurs worked 65 million years ago. And then they didn't.
No species between animals and humans?
How many ways to respond to that ...
1. We are animals.
2. Which animal? A rat? A rabbit? An ant? A bonobo?
3. Compare humans with bonobos and chimpanzees - we share physical features, large brains, cultural development, tool use, war; go to the gorillas and orangutans and we lose some of the cultural development and war; go to gibbons and we lose the tool use; go to monkeys and we lose the larger brains; and on and on ... there's no sharp dividing line in the sense you're suggesting. There are graduations of difference and similarity. Of course, we're human and they're not. But look at it from their perspective and they could argue the exact same thing.
And why aren't they tapping away on computers and driving sports cars and watching reality TV? Well, we got there first, and the nature of our cultural development - despite, or perhaps because of our shrinking brain - is to expand and control. They didn't have a chance.
But who knows? Replay evolution on Earth again, and maybe it's the bonobos who are chopping down the forests where the humans live and wiping them all out. Maybe it's the bonobos who are arguing with other about whether bonobos were supernaturally created by their bonobo god or evolved from the rest of life on earth.