by AK - Jeff 328 Replies latest jw friends
Neaderthals had average brain sizes a big bigger than ours but they were intellectually "limited". Their tools hardly changed over thousands of years. Homo sapiens have developed technology exponentially. Apparently its about brain organisation. We got lucky
Surly it's logical to group all like humans current and ancient into a "human category", no?
-Sab
Take that and smoke it Sabawhichamacallits
How large is the brain of a Blue Whale? (I acually don't know). I should look it up.
-Sab
"Its about the same size of an average family car". (This person mistook grams for pounds!!!)
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Blue_whale's_brain#ixzz1NaV9qiPb
Be careful what you accept as fact. The true answer is that the blue whales brain is approximately 6000 grams or 13.2 pounds. And, while it is the largest animal, its brain mass is still second to the "Bullhead" or Sperm whale, at 7800 grams or 17.16 pounds. This fact possibly makes the Bullhead whale the most intelligent animal on the planet.
-Sab
Surly it's logical to group all like humans current and ancient into a "human category", no?
Paleontologists argue endlessly over whether a particular fossil belongs in Homo or Australopithecus. Amusingly if you give the same fossil sequence to a bunch of creationists they can't agree which is ape and which is human. All distinctions are arbitrary
Paleontologists argue endlessly over whether a particular fossil belongs in Homo or Australopithecus. Amusingly if you give the same fossil sequence to a bunch of creationists they can't agree which is ape and which is human. All distinctions are arbitrary
So you don't believe that we are different. I see. The facts don't support your conclusion. You are not holding yourself up to your own scientific standards.
Lets go back to the animals, not because I want to drag that out again, but I guess I do.
Your type (sorry to sterotype, but I see patterns) seems to find it perfectly stomachable to speak for the animals and judge whether or not they "suffer." To make a point of course. It's not only you it's a lot of other people too (including me). We want to "save the animals" we wan't to help them escape extinction. It's noble and admirable from a certain moral perspective.
Even the Bible says the "animals are in subject to the man." We named them! There ya go, we're arrogent. Maybe that's what separates us from the animals. We think we have a say in things.
And here come the the scientists again. Cataloging everything and developing/uncovering law. The true pursuit of truth! Another noble choice from a certain moral perspective.
When science speaks of the "old humans" like neaderthals and the like I feel as if I am talking to a fortune teller trying to commune with my ancestors. You don't know them, I don't know them. We have the things they left behind that random time and erosion has preserved for us. The whole picture is actually just a book of fantasy that will never be truly exposed in our lifetimes (I don't think). We still use brushes to uncover our past!
We are different and the observations to support that conclusion are yours for the taking. Why do we feel the need to use our "brushes" to meticulously dig up our past and explain it? Why do some use it for Good and some use it to distort truth to further an agenda? Why do we have passion? We are different, man, and no bones in the ground, no matter how they are presented, are going to change that.
-Sab
Dolphins are incredibly intelligent. We've only begun to scratch the surface in understanding them. But we're making progress...
So you don't believe that we are different.
Different from what? You switch between comparisons to our ancestors and comparisons to modern animal species and all the time you seem more interesed in point scoring than discussion.
If you are questioning our common ancestry I no more have the patience than I would have to debate a flat earther. Its possible you don't mean that, its hard to tell among all the rhetoric.
Dolphins are incredibly intelligent. We've only begun to scratch the surface in understanding them. But we're making progress...
I have noticed this too. I'd like to do more research on Dolphins. They are part of some incredible stories, but if Dolphins are as evolved or more so than humans then shouldn't there be much more in the animal kingdom that have found a way to match pace?
-Sab
if Dolphins are as evolved or more so than humans
What do you mean by "more evolved"? Please be careful to avoid the old Victorian image of the great chain of being with white male humans at the top. A tapeworm could not possibly be any better evolved to exploit its environment
If you are questioning our common ancestry I no more have the patience than I would have to debate a flat earther. Its possible you don't mean that, its hard to tell among all the rhetoric.
The bones are real and data supports that we came from them. That doesn't mean we have enough data to catalog the intelligence gap between us and our ancestors. We can't come up with conclusions like "there is no God" because of the data. It is highly unscientific. "God X does not exist" can be supported by the data.
When I ask for evidence of being the "same as everything else" bringing up neaderthal bones andtheir tools is not compelling. We are not the same as everything else; we are different than everything else.
Bees are very similar to ants, but then again they are extremely different. Humans have "ape counterparts" of which show rudimentary similarities to ourselves. Surely the data supports a "chosen ape" to be granted the gift of higher intelligence. If that "choosing" did in fact happen by any means then God, in fact, exists through whatever force caused us to be "chosen."
-Sab
