What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

[_ Old Earth _] Evolution

lordkalvan said:
I think recognising it is the first step in lessening its impact. I also think systematic approaches such as the scientific method help in this respect, as do the processes of peer review and critical thinking.
Click to expand...


I wish we had another name for it. The idea of crosschecking with others to remove a possible personal misunderstanding is key. The idea of continuously retesting to see howmany condition a "truth" holds up is key. The more"conditions" they hold up under, the "truer" they are.
Just because they don't hold up under all conditions doesn't mean a "truth" is totaly wrong. It just means we don't know it all yet.

I love when what I know today is shown to be incompletetomorrow. It means I found out somethingnew. I get a glimpse of how the universereally works. I find being wrong iscool. I was atheist for most of mylife. I found out I was wrong. But to think there is a "poof there itis" god shows us something about ourselves.
 
felix said:
Most animals can do two step tools. But, no animal including apes can do three steps in tools. Only humans can. It means, not simply using a tool to get the job done but using the tool as an indirect agent to get the job done. For example, a banana is kept inside a hollow glass which you can see and you can push the banana down with a stick from under. No monkey or ape was able to do it. If any animal can do it, then it can learn to use any tools known and even build tools for itself, and even compete with humans. This is the intelligence that defines us a humans. so, telling me that a line cannot be drawn is nonsense and unscientific.

EDIT:
There are several tests... one of the famous is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_and_banana_problem
Click to expand...

I was talking about evolution time lines, not definingtraits in species.
 
AB517 said:
that's right.

The actual transition is not like drawing a line in the sand. But rather a continuum.But the speed of that transition was very fast. Again, more proof of a god. "time" is a human construct. In terms of geologic time, it was a line.
Click to expand...


It is analogous to our evolution in Thinking, which I would like to call spiritualevolution, in that we can draw lines between the Seven Ages of Man, and in hind sight, see that giant steps which transformed us from rather myopic and feeble minded animals to rather sophisticated thinkers of today, by comparison.

When we see the gradualism from the Stone Age to the present unfolding Information Age, it is as if totally different kinds of men lived in each.

I believe the refeence to the next evolution was when God said he would not change us again by a flood of a new species, but by growth in our powers of Consciousness, i.e., we shall gain moreaccess to our own phylogenetic Unconscious memories of past lives and realize that we repeartedly Born Again.
 
AB517 said:
I was talking about evolution time lines, not definingtraits in species.
Click to expand...



Yes, indeed...

A good example would be Koko the "talking gorilla."

Koko converses with her keeper(s), very intelligently I might add.
 
AB517 said:
Sounds like it would make a great Fundamentalist.
Click to expand...

I am a Theistic Evolution Fundamentalists who stands between the Fundamentally atheistic bible Bashers and the stone walling Christian fundamentally medieval apologists.

I see both are right in that one has the correct corresponding story to Genesis, while the other has faith in a Bible he misinterprets.
 
felix said:
There can only be ONE Y-Chromosome Adam and ONE mtDNA Eve, no matter how much you try.
Click to expand...
Try what? What's your point? Just because there was only one mtDNA Eve doesn't mean there wasn't also at the same time a Mary, Martha, Miriam and Maud, not to mention a Tom, Tam, Tim and Toby. Just because there was only one Y-chromosome Adam doesn't mean there wasn't also at the same time a Billy, Bob, Bernie and Barry, as well as a Betty, Barbara, Brenda and Beatrice.
Let me know the name of the so called ring species for humans evolution if I am unaware of.
Click to expand...
And another point seems to go shooting over your head.
 
felix said:
The after-thought is still part of the plan and the designer is at work.
Click to expand...
But, according to you, clearly not a part of the original plan. Which rather brings us back to the point I was making.
Remember that he took rest only on the 7th day and was working for the past 6 days?
Click to expand...
And?
You should read Genesis account yourself for it. All what you require is in there.
Click to expand...
I have. What do you think I require to support your claim that Adam could populate the world all by himself?
 
Most animals can do two step tools. But, no animal including apes can do three steps in tools. Only humans can. It means, not simply using a tool to get the job done but using the tool as an indirect agent to get the job done.
Click to expand...

No, that's wrong. For example:

Between 1913 and 1917, Wolfgang Kohler conducted observations and experiments on the intelligence of chimpanzees at a field station in North Africa. In one study a male chimpanzee, Sultan, was led into a room where a banana had been tied to a string and suspended from the ceiling in a corner. A large wooden box had also been placed in the center of the room, open side up. Sultan first tried to reach the fruit by jumping, but this quickly proved futile. He then "paced restlessly Up and down, suddenly stood still in front of the box, seized it, tipped it . . . straight towards the objective . . . began to climb up it . . . and springing upwards with all his force, tore down the banana." A few days later Sultan was taken into a room with a much higher ceiling, where again there was a suspended banana, as well as a wooden box and a stick. After failing to get the banana with the stick alone, Sultan sat down "with an air of fatigue . . . gazed about him, and scratched his head." He then stared at the boxes, suddenly leaped up, seized a box and a stick, pushed the box underneath the banana, reached up with the stick and knocked the fruit down. Kohler was struck with the apparently thoughtful period that preceded Sultan's solution, as well as with his sudden and directed performance. Such "insightful" behavior apparently contrasted with other forms of learning, which develop gradually and depend on reinforcement.
http://web.mesacc.edu/dept/d10/asb/origins/hominid_journey/optional3.html

For example, a banana is kept inside a hollow glass which you can see and you can push the banana down with a stick from under.
Click to expand...

As you can see, chimps do far more sophisticated things than that. They are remarkably good at fashioning tools for termite-fishing, and proved to be much better at making the tools and using them than humans trying to imitate them.

Chimpanzee subsistence technology: Materials and skills

Geza Teleki

Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, 409 Social Sciences Building, University Park, Pa. 16802, U.S.A.
 
cupid dave said:
I am a Theistic Evolution Fundamentalists who stands between the Fundamentally atheistic bible Bashers and the stone walling Christian fundamentally medieval apologists.

I see both are right in that one has the correct corresponding story to Genesis, while the other has faith in a Bible he misinterprets.
Click to expand...

I am kind of the same.

I see the problem being people, not religion or science.
 
AB517 said:
I am kind of the same.

I see the problem being people, not religion or science.
Click to expand...


Yep...

Some people have told me that other people here see me as very intimidating, which I surmize to mean that the things I post and then defend with hard science and academics.

But what I am doing is nerely showing that both Modern Empirical Science and Genesis actually correspond to one another.
These two narratives correspond to the extent that they can be understood, whether one elects to read the Bible from an ancient and archaic perspective and happily accept the story, or require that Genesis conform to a more factually correct unfolding of the cosmic evolution story.

But on both sides, the theists and the long programmed and doctrine protectorism of the church people refuse to stop their debate and to ignore this synthesis between them dialectically.
 
cupid dave said:
Yep...

Some people have told me that other people here see me as very intimidating, which I surmize to mean that the things I post and then defend with hard science and academics.

But what I am doing is nerely showing that both Modern Empirical Science and Genesis actually correspond to one another.
These two narratives correspond to the extent that they can be understood, whether one elects to read the Bible from an ancient and archaic perspective and happily accept the story, or require that Genesis conform to a more factually correct unfolding of the cosmic evolution story.

But on both sides, the theists and the long programmed and doctrine protectorism of the church people refuse to stop their debate and to ignore this synthesis between them dialectically.
Click to expand...


Mostly I Agree,

Calling them stupid back then is like calling Newton stupid becausehe couldn't get mercury's orbit down. For the information they had at the time, they almost hit the nail on thehead. "...from dirt..."? wow,amazing insight. I don't understand whypeople don't let the whole 6-day thing go. Jesus changed his religious stance based on new observations, why can'twe?

I learnt from Jesus to follow god with your eyes open. That god is more than you know and God wants youlearn as much as you can. "locking" god into a book is offering god as an apple. I will bite, but only because it is a fruitof the garden and it helps clean my teeth after a meal. I will not take a bite of the apple (bible)when offered as the only thing need to know god. Jesus was against that. the serpant did that once already, we don't have to bite again.


 
Adam said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDntbGRPeEU

The next thing you know, pigeons will learn how to make tools for themselves, then they'll have their own little industrial revolution.
Click to expand...

This is still a two step tool process and not actually a three step tool. The pigeon will be intelligent enough only if it uses a third step in tool (or for example, as the 'Monkey_and_banana_problem', the pigeon must use a third tool like stick to pull the banana down) or use two or more tools in combination to get the job done.
The video shows only one step tool which is common among birds, like using stones to crack nuts etc.
There is not a single animal that had successfully used a three step tools.
 
AB517 said:
I was talking about evolution time lines, not definingtraits in species.
Click to expand...

So, why did the pigeon had not become intelligent even after the "evolution time lines" of millions of years today?
 
Barbarian said:
No, that's wrong. For example:

Between 1913 and 1917, Wolfgang Kohler conducted observations and experiments on the intelligence of chimpanzees at a field station in North Africa. In one study a male chimpanzee, Sultan, was led into a room where a banana had been tied to a string and suspended from the ceiling in a corner. A large wooden box had also been placed in the center of the room, open side up. Sultan first tried to reach the fruit by jumping, but this quickly proved futile. He then "paced restlessly Up and down, suddenly stood still in front of the box, seized it, tipped it . . . straight towards the objective . . . began to climb up it . . . and springing upwards with all his force, tore down the banana." A few days later Sultan was taken into a room with a much higher ceiling, where again there was a suspended banana, as well as a wooden box and a stick. After failing to get the banana with the stick alone, Sultan sat down "with an air of fatigue . . . gazed about him, and scratched his head." He then stared at the boxes, suddenly leaped up, seized a box and a stick, pushed the box underneath the banana, reached up with the stick and knocked the fruit down. Kohler was struck with the apparently thoughtful period that preceded Sultan's solution, as well as with his sudden and directed performance. Such "insightful" behavior apparently contrasted with other forms of learning, which develop gradually and depend on reinforcement.
http://web.mesacc.edu/dept/d10/asb/origins/hominid_journey/optional3.html



As you can see, chimps do far more sophisticated things than that. They are remarkably good at fashioning tools for termite-fishing, and proved to be much better at making the tools and using them than humans trying to imitate them.

Chimpanzee subsistence technology: Materials and skills

Geza Teleki

Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, 409 Social Sciences Building, University Park, Pa. 16802, U.S.A.
Click to expand...

Most of these do not constitute actual proof of intelligence nor any greater significance because, animals can be easily trained to use these tools ... have you seen these in circus?

I am not talking about these tricks of training and show as an observation to prove a point. Three step tool problem is using 3 or more tools in combination to get the job done. The above is still using 2 tools and even could be easily trained and no intelligence is required for this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top