Evolution Deniers - An Endangered Species (page 6)

cofty

Thought police?

No you can think any bullshit you want. Just stop trashing my threads with it. Last time you posted over 30 pages of this crap.

Start your own thread called "Superstitious Things Roman Catholics Still Believe".

TD

What strong evidence?

I guess it depends on how you define self awareness.

To be fair, soft sciences by their very nature don't usually yield hard evidence, but there is plenty of evidence of cognitive ability (as I would define it) at or around the intelligence level of a dog.

A dog who patiently waits until you are gone before misbehaving has shown premeditation; a dog who displays signs of jealousy when another dog gets a bigger reward for the same behavior has shown emotion; a dog who senses and responds to human facial expressions and body language has shown intuition and a dog who can play simple guessing games has shown at least a rudimentary level of deduction.

Before writing this off as the biased observations of someone who likes dogs, I'd point out that these and similar things have been studied in controlled environments designed to eliminate that bias using MRI's and other equipment.

Caedes

Are you talking about the mirror test and/or the spot test? They're are very controversial.

They might be controversial to you but I am not aware of any particular controversy in scientific circles. It is a psychological test so it isn't a hard science but there are some very well planned empirical studies out there that show that some animals are aware they are seeing themselves in a mirror. Even human babies don't pass this test when they are young.

John_Mann

They might be controversial to you but I am not aware of any particular controversy in scientific circles.

As usual you seem to be very ignorant about science.

Every scientific paper always mentions the controversy and they avoid the term consciousness but uses the technical term "visual self-recognition".

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16432640

" For 30 years Gallup's (Science 167:86-87, 1970) mark test, which consists of confronting a mirror-experienced test animal with its own previously altered mirror image, usually a color mark on forehead, eyebrow or ear, has delivered valuable results about the distribution of visual self-recognition in non-human primates. Chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans and, less frequently, gorillas can learn to correctly understand the reflection of their body in a mirror. However, the standard version of the mark test is good only for positively proving the existence of self-recognition. Conclusive statements about the lack of self-recognition are more difficult because of the methodological constraints of the test. This situation has led to a persistent controversy about the power of Gallup's original technique. We devised a new variant of the test which permits more unequivocal decisions about both the presence and absence of self-recognition. This new procedure was tested with marmoset monkeys (Callithrix jacchus), following extensive training with mirror-related tasks to facilitate performance in the standard mark test. The results show that a slightly altered mark test with a new marking substance (chocolate cream) can help to reliably discriminate between true negative results, indicating a real lack of ability to recognize oneself in a mirror, from false negative results that are due to methodological particularities of the standard test. Finally, an evolutionary hypothesis is put forward as to why many primates can use a mirror instrumentally - i.e. know how to use it for grasping at hidden objects - while failing in the decisive mark test."

What the guy who invented the test said:

“Self-awareness is defined as the ability to become the object of your own attention, consciousness as being aware of your own existence, and mind as the capacity to be aware of your own mental states… either you are aware of being aware or you are unaware of being aware, and the latter is tantamount to being unconscious.” (Gallup G “Do minds exist in species other than our own?” Neuroscience & Behavioral Reviews 9(1985):631-41).

He clearly made a distinction between self-awareness, consciousness and mind.

Now show me a scientific paper where it's said animals possess consciousness without any shadow of controversy.

John_Mann

read up about what you are talking about John-Mann - sorry to dismiss it so easily. but there is one thing I do take exception to and that is the early date 4,000 years ago. I think that if anything like what you say happened it happened a lot lot earlier - - however I agree that hallucinogenic things had something to do with this sort of expansion of consciousness - indeed there is evidence that humans learned about the hallucinogen properties of plants from animals - or that chimps achieved a cross over to humanoid species by means of such plants - I mean what other explanation could there be for our need for spirits (literal spirits that is)

I don't know why you keep saying I'm talking about 4,000 ago when I say 4,000 BC.

And yes I know this drug hypothesis. The first man was an ape that ate a mushroom. :)

Caedes

As usual you seems to be very ignorant about science. (sic)

Care to show where my posts indicate a lack of knowledge about science?

Congratulations you have mastered 'ctrl' C and 'ctrl' V although I am not convinced that that is a good indicator of intelligence or if you have just been trained very well. Can I ask do you get a treat whenever you copy and paste something?

The Rebel

When I knocked on the door as a J.W, then I thought I could answer any question. (How wrong I was)

Confucius, " Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous"

its interesting that written evoltion has evoloved with " 😜👌😖" and " twitter" and lovers of the written word have become an " endangered speech" 🤣😊😄🤣

John_Mann

Care to show where my posts indicate a lack of knowledge about science?

C'mon man! You said the Gallup's test was not controversial in science when it's highly controversial.

It's not an evil thing to be ignorant but to be dishonest is.

The Rebel

John Mann " Care to show me where my posts " indicate" a luck of knowledge about science"

C'mon John! if you want to challenge your "knowledge " on science simply visit the appropriate " science" sites. I am sure your comments would be highly respected.

John_Mann

C'mon John! if you want to challenge your "knowledge " on science simply visit the appropriate " science" sites. I am sure your comments would be highly respected.

What? Are you serious or am I in some kind of twilight zone?

I posted from NCBI and from Gallup itself.

And previously I answered cofty with a link from Nature.

Evolution Deniers - An Endangered Species

Share this