Darwin's theory of gradual evolution not supported by geolog
waltur wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Problem with natural selection is how are we alive then.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
i think you'll find a wealth of information that agrees with you at http://www.answersingenesis.org/.
One does not have to prove a known fact. Humans have survived and overwhelmed all other creatures. That cannot be denied. If you want to discover just how this came about that is a matter for examination.
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Problem with natural selection is how are we alive then.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
We're cleverer than most other animals. A major idea is that human beings partially started moving away from the pack as we developed the ability to make tools, and so this drove our evolution to become smarter and smarter.
I don't think our being clever alone was the thing that separated the primates that eventually developed into homosapiens from the non-human primates which still exist today. It was really the ability for groups to collectively learn and pass on knowledge that drove the process. Of course, the need to be able to both learn and teach survival techniques handed the advantage to families/tribes with greater brain power.
The primates that exist today don't have cultures or acquired knowledge bases. They are clever compared to other mammals but they haven't evolved to be as clever as homosapiens because their behaviors are almost completely pre-determined by genetics rather than learned through culture.
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
Inuyasha wrote:
Problem with natural selection is how are we alive then.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
If we're weak physically it's because of our actual way of life. If you want to know the strengh of a phrehistoric man needing a lot of physical activities to survive, look to athletes.
BTW, it's normal that bear are stronger, as they are more massive.
_________________
Down with speculators!! !
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
How did we survive long enough to learn how to make tools that would serve as weapons though?
Teamwork. Humans have language and can co-ordinate their activities, such as defense and hunting. One on one humans are not strong, but as a co-ordinated force we can lick just about any mammal or reptile on the planet.
ruveyn
Uh other animals have teamwork, I don't feel teamwork alone would have been that useful verses the predators our ancestors would have had to face.
Try beating up a Grizzly with your bare hands sometime.
Bears don't attack groups of people. They may attack one or two, but the fact is that humans and their ancestors lived in groups. Out of all the bear attacks in Glacier National Park recently. None have been on a group of more than three people. Most victims of bear attacks were alone at the time.
Also, early humans were not exposed to Grizzly bears. They lived in different climates.
Lecks wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
How did we survive long enough to learn how to make tools that would serve as weapons though?
You assume we were the ones who came up with the idea. Most other primates living today can utilise tools to some extent, and we did not teach them.
Indeed. Chimpanzees are especially famous for sharpening sticks (spears, in other words) and using them to hunt for smaller primates.
ruveyn wrote:
waltur wrote:
Try beating up a Grizzly with your bare hands sometime.
[/quote
How about a half dozen humans acting in a co-ordinated fashion against that one grizzly. The grizzly does not stand a chance. He might kill a human or two but he is going down.
Humans did not go one on one with the large animals they hunted. They operated in a co-ordinated fashion as hunting parties.
ruveyn
But then how did we know how to make the tools to fight. A large group of humans with their bare hands and maybe sticks or rocks wouldn't be enough to fight an angry grizzly. You actually would have to have weapons.
@ Ambrose_Rotten
Grizzlies were just an example and there were other animals that hunted in packs. How did we survive long enough to learn to make weapons.
@ Tollorin
The fastest human sprinters can't outrun most predators.
@ marshall
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
Inuyasha wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
waltur wrote:
Try beating up a Grizzly with your bare hands sometime.
[/quote
How about a half dozen humans acting in a co-ordinated fashion against that one grizzly. The grizzly does not stand a chance. He might kill a human or two but he is going down.
Humans did not go one on one with the large animals they hunted. They operated in a co-ordinated fashion as hunting parties.
ruveyn
But then how did we know how to make the tools to fight. A large group of humans with their bare hands and maybe sticks or rocks wouldn't be enough to fight an angry grizzly. You actually would have to have weapons.
The grizzly will not mess with a group of people, regardless of how well the people can fight it off.
Inuyasha wrote:
@ Ambrose_Rotten
Grizzlies were just an example and there were other animals that hunted in packs. How did we survive long enough to learn to make weapons.
Grizzlies were just an example and there were other animals that hunted in packs. How did we survive long enough to learn to make weapons.
Tools were developed by earlier, stronger ancestors. By the time we evolved into Homo sapiens, we already had tools.
Inuyasha wrote:
@ marshall
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
The ability to maintain a cultural knowledge base through many generations requires much more sophistication than simple communication. If you look at other pack animals of the same species they are all basically the same in terms of tool use and behaviors. Everything is instinctual. Homo-sapiens learn from each other and retain vast quantities of collective information. That's the most important thing that really separates us from the apes.
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
@ marshall
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
The ability to maintain a cultural knowledge base through many generations requires much more sophistication than simple communication. If you look at other pack animals of the same species they are all basically the same in terms of tool use and behaviors. Everything is instinctual. Homo-sapiens learn from each other and retain vast quantities of collective information. That's the most important thing that really separates us from the apes.
Actually, dogs have their own personalities and are more than simple instincts. I have had a cat that could turn on lights and manipulate switches on a radio (he taught himself how to do that). Wolves actually use tactics to ambush prey, they don't just run at the prey with no strategy whatsoever. To imply animals are entirely stupid relying on instincts and incapable of learning doesn't fit with observations.
Inuyasha wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
@ marshall
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
Other animals have ways of communicating basically their own languages particularly pack animals.
The ability to maintain a cultural knowledge base through many generations requires much more sophistication than simple communication. If you look at other pack animals of the same species they are all basically the same in terms of tool use and behaviors. Everything is instinctual. Homo-sapiens learn from each other and retain vast quantities of collective information. That's the most important thing that really separates us from the apes.
Actually, dogs have their own personalities and are more than simple instincts. I have had a cat that could turn on lights and manipulate switches on a radio (he taught himself how to do that). Wolves actually use tactics to ambush prey, they don't just run at the prey with no strategy whatsoever. To imply animals are entirely stupid relying on instincts and incapable of learning doesn't fit with observations.
Animals do learn and pass on that learning to their fellows. That's true of primates, birds, canines, felines and even bacteria See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 121439.htm
But they have no organized symbolic capabilities and humans excel at that.
Inuyasha wrote:
Problem with natural selection is how are we alive then.
If by "we" you mean conservatives, one does wonder...
Quote:
We have are a lot weaker physically than other animals our size, our vision is set up to be a predator yet we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We are extremely slow compared to most animals. Need I go on.
Humans are able to dominate other life forms, we simply use other abilities than simple size or strength. Also: what about our vision is set up to be a predator? Our night vision is terrible, and our ancestors did not have extremely meat-dependent diets.
I seldom find creationists foolish enough to question natural selection. Natural selection isn't at all "controversial" even among creationists. Natural selection is a quite readily observed fact. Any high school student with a jar of fruit flies can verify it for you.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Orwell wrote:
our ancestors did not have extremely meat-dependent diets.
Our ancestors were scavengers, mostly. Our first tools were to strip meat from bone.
_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823
?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson
Inuyasha wrote:
Uh other animals have teamwork, I don't feel teamwork alone would have been that useful verses the predators our ancestors would have had to face.
Not to the extent that humans do, as we have developed abstract language, sophisticated tool use, and culture passed down along many generations that allows one human to benefit from the cumulative lifetime experience of all his ancestors. (Note: All of these developments occurred in other hominid species before the origin of anatomically modern humans AKA Homo sapiens. Those hominids were stouter and stronger than we are; our evolutionary path has emphasized more and more tool use and disregarded brute physical strength)
Quote:
Try beating up a Grizzly with your bare hands sometime.
A Grizzly is huge. There are very few animals on this planet that could take one of those on. However, a reasonably healthy adult human male should be strong enough to fight (and have a decent chance of winning) against many common large predators, such as a mountain lion or an individual wolf in unarmed combat. Add tool use, even crude tools, into the equation, and humans clearly have the decisive advantage. Humans have been known to kill mother-fucking whales with pointed sticks, they're not exactly pushovers.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
skafather84 wrote:
Orwell wrote:
our ancestors did not have extremely meat-dependent diets.
Our ancestors were scavengers, mostly. Our first tools were to strip meat from bone.
Scavengers and gatherers. Once we got the hang of pointed sticks, we started hunting more.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
Inuyasha wrote:
The fastest human sprinters can't outrun most predators.
Some sprinters can outrun horses!
In true humans are not buillt for sprint, we are made for long running, running toward our prey until it collapse from exhaustion. May be one of the reasons why we lost so much of our fur, extending our endurance by putting out more heat through sweating.
_________________
Down with speculators!! !
Last edited by Tollorin on 16 Nov 2010, 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.