Evolution

[desi tmac91]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (7Goat @ May 18 2007, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah but what is that even based on?I did read this really good book about evolution vs. creation, and it was pretty interesting. Too bad I don't remember what it was. It basically talked about how the Bible can be reliable for scientific information but it's odd that the creation and evolution, basically how we got here, is still up for debate. Also, a lot of scientists have admitted that they can't believe how this world came without a bigger thing (God).</div>My belief that it was based on the Quran since the two holy books are so similar, and that the Quran was never changed since it was written.Yeah and thats where we got scientists beat. How did we get here? I doubt cells or some stuff like that had nothing to do with it. There has to be a God, there is no other explanation from what I see it.

 

[gentile]

Well, the Bible isn't just about a God that creates and let's things be. Similarly, the Quran also is an assertion about the nature of God. His desires and requirements. That's where the debate should be centered.The argument over evolution is just a method of politicizing spirituality against science.

 

[Milgod]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (desi tmac91 @ May 19 2007, 04:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>My belief that it was based on the Quran since the two holy books are so similar, and that the Quran was never changed since it was written.Yeah and thats where we got scientists beat. How did we get here? I doubt cells or some stuff like that had nothing to do with it. There has to be a God, there is no other explanation from what I see it.</div>OMG!?!Why? Why does there HAVE to be a god? Because you don't uderstand science? Because you have been told there was a god since you were a child?

 

[desi tmac91]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Milgod @ May 18 2007, 11:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>OMG!?!Why? Why does there HAVE to be a god? Because you don't uderstand science? Because you have been told there was a god since you were a child?</div>Ok first chill out. Now tell me why you think there's no God or how we exist?

 

[KobeBryant_24]

There is a god. I know he exists. I have a close relationship now with Jesus and God. Ever since I have been praying more and stuff, my life has gotten alot better. Call it corny, I know it sounds that way, but I don't care.

 

[Milgod]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (desi tmac91 @ May 19 2007, 06:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Ok first chill out. Now tell me why you think there's no God or how we exist?</div>There is no god, its an insane idea. If nobody believed in god and all of a sudden people started spouting this stuff then you would be called crazy. The only reason you're not is because people have been telling their children for years is true.I shouldn't have to prove their isn't a god, you should have to prove their is. Just like if I was to claim that there are invisible pink elephants flying around the world singing J-Lo songs I would expect you to disprove it, I would have to prove it. By the way IMO that idea is not even as crazy as there being a god.

 

[pjcolpitts?]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ May 17 2007, 10:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>One problem with this is that evolution is not linear. In other words, it does not always go single-celled organism --> multi-celled organism --> fish --> amphibian --> reptile --> ape --> human --> whatever. Now, obviously the first two are pretty undisputable since you'd doubt that the multi-celled organism would come first, but in other cases, people seem to misunderstand how evolution works. It can go in any direction... an population of a certain animal could gain a "positive" trait (like an opposable thumb) or a "negative" trait (like cancer). An animal could gain the ability to breath out of water or lose it... there's nothing in DNA that says that we will only get better and gain wings or anything. Anyway, I'm digressing a bit. The point is that it is not believed that we evolved from chimps or apes, but a common ancestor. That causes a problem, because if you are trying to find a link between us and apes, there is none. The link you would need to find is the one between us and said ancestor (which would also need to be found).</div>See, I understand all that, but I can see how you could take what I've said the other way. I call it a "missing link" not because we're looking for the "ape-turned man", but the common ancestor like you said, which in turn is still a missing link. Anyways, glad you went into further detail than I did because you explained it a lot better than I could have.Also, I'd like to talk about the whole "Why do you believe in God and the Bible and whatnot" question. Some people are saying they believe in God, but are then asked "Well how do you prove the Bible with science; if you cant prove it with science, then its not real blah blah blah." Well, if you were able to prove things in the Bible true, then it wouldnt be faith, it'd be science. There is a reason why its called faith, because you just have to believe in it in your heart of hearts to be faith." To me, its quite a simple idea and logic.

 

[Drake24]

This stuff really interests me. I personally don't believe in evolution, it doesn't make sense to me. Creationism makes more sense. What I actually believe, I am not completely sure- but I like to keep an open mind. When I was researching creationism vs. evolution one time, I came across some interesting stuff. I am going to share with you guys some of it (by the way, when I say creationism, I am more so talking about christianity since that is what the stuff I found was based on). More than 90% of this stuff will come from the resources I found and my earth and space class at school. Even if you don't believe in this stuff, I am not 100% that I do, it is still interesting if you actually care about finding out where we actually came from. You have to have an open mind.______The Big Bang theoryFirst of all, a lot of people think the "Big Bang" theory supports evolution and not creationism, when in fact, it does support creationism. The theory states that the entire universe began as a super-hot, super massive "explosive point," and that the universe continues to expand. The first chapter of Genesis (in the Bible) says that God created the universe out of nothing. The Big Bang theory also says that the universe was created out of nothing. If the universe was created the way the Big Bang theory says it was, we should see stars and galaxies moving away from each other (and away from us). We should be able to detect cosmic background radiation from the Big Bang's fiery explosion. Both of these things have been observed as the theory predicts.The Big Bang theory is actually bad news for evolution. Why? Darwin's theory requires extremely large amounts of time to produce the necessary changes in living forms. However, the Big Bang theory says that there was a beginning, a point in time when the universe was created, and that point in time wasn't long ago- not long enough for any organism to evolve. According to most matchematicl calculations, a universe even 100 billion years old is not old enough for the development of a single cell.Some scientists dislike the Big Bang idea because it sounds too much like biblical Creation.In the 1920s, Albert Einstein said that the universe was infinitely large and infinitely old- with no beginning. Later, Einstein said this was, "..the greatest mistake of my life." He understood that there was a beginning.Is there any proof that evolution happend?It depends on what you mean by "evolution." The term "evolution" basically means "change," and is too broad to be very useful in a discussion. There are four basic ways the word evolution is used: Microevolution, Macroevolution, Universal Common Descent, and Natural Selection (survival of the fittest).Darwin's followers say that life forms became more and more complex through a gradual process. However some scientists have given up on that notion of gradual change. They insist that there simply is not enough time since the beginning of the universe for all of the required changes to have taken place gradually. Darwin's theory of evolution does not account for the beginning of life on earth.Darwin even said, "Not one chang of species into another is on record...we cannot prove that a single species has been changed." (Charles Darwin, My Life and Letters Vol. 1 Page 210 1905)Can molecules of non-living matter be transformed by a natural process into the organic building blocks of life (proteins)?It is virtually impossible to produce important life molecules, such as proteins, from simple molecules. Proteins in all living things are assembled from basic "alphabet" of 20 amino acids. Each different type of protein is formed from a unique arrangement of these chemical "letters." To form a protein that actually works, the amino acid letters must be arranged in precise sequences, like letters of a sentence. This precise sequence creates a certain protein that has a specific function in the cell. The odds that all of these factors will occur on their own is statistically impossible.Does the Miller-Urey experiment prove that organic life can be built by a natural process?No, the conclusions drawn from the Miller-Urey experiment are no longer considered relevant by the scientific community. For those of you that know the experiment (you learned it in school), I will move on. There are two main problems with the experiment:1- Scientists agree that the atmosphere of early Earth was not at all like what the Miller-Urey experiment used. In fact, if Miller's experiment were preformed with a realistic atmosphere, no amino acids would form.2- Connection amino acids to form a useful protein is a lot harder than just making an amino acid. Hooking amino acids together requires removing a molecule of water for each amino acid added to the chain, but amino acids are highly water-soluble. This means that although water is a necessary part of the Miller-Urey theory, the presence of water also keeps amino acids from forming proteins.Do the changes in Galapago's finch beaks, or changes through the selective breeding, prove that evolution takes place?The answer is no, if you would wish me to explain why, I will. It is just a lot of typing and I doubt many people actually read through this whole thing.Does the fossil record support Darwin's theory?No, Darwin predicted that if his theory were correct, there should be evidence that simple life forms gradually developed into more and more complex creatures.Paleontologists generally state that the fossil record does not support Darwin's theory in two major ways:1- Animal types tend to appear suddenly in the fossil record (not gradually, as Darwin predicted). Therefore, each animal type is "missing" the "link" to its former ancestor.2- Animals tend to remain relatively unchanged throughout their time on earth (not slowly developing into new forms as Darwin predicted).Does the Cambrian Explosion prove Darwin's theory?No. In fact, Darwin predicted that we would find evidence that life began simply and progressed into big differences. Instead, fossils from the Cambrian layer show multiple animal types with huge differences appearing at once.Ape to Man, Eohippus to modern horse, and punctuated equilibrium.If anyone wants me to post about these, I can. But like I said, I don't even know if anyone is going to read this whole post._______I found all of this interesting, and it is factual. I mean, people act like evolution is fact, it isn't. The theory of evolution has not been proven and cannot be replicated in a laboratory. Darwin even thought it was a little out there when he came up with it, he said, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I confess, absurd in the highest degree." (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species). It isn't like evolution has all of this proof, it doesn't. People like to say that "I don't believe in creationism because you can't test it." Well, you can't test evolution either. You can find out things about both that help solve the puzzle (like what I posted about the Big Bang). Am I saying either one is right or wrong? No, not really. I am saying that evolution has a lot of holes, and to me creationism makes more sense. What I believe, I am not sure yet. But I have evolution on the bottom of things I am considering truth.

 

[ReppinTheD]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Milgod @ May 19 2007, 08:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There is no god, its an insane idea. If nobody believed in god and all of a sudden people started spouting this stuff then you would be called crazy. The only reason you're not is because people have been telling their children for years is true.I shouldn't have to prove their isn't a god, you should have to prove their is. Just like if I was to claim that there are invisible pink elephants flying around the world singing J-Lo songs I would expect you to disprove it, I would have to prove it. By the way IMO that idea is not even as crazy as there being a god.</div>Here's what I always say...I've never seen a book but the Qur'an do this (read on)...and that's why I think Islam seperates itself from the rest of the 3 major religons. The Qur'an has many chapters in it that are purely scientific. I believe God works with science...the things that go on in this world, that make life possible, are made possible because of God...the reason I believe there to be a God is because of the Qur'an's detail and accuracy. In most religious scriptures/books, there isn't anything you can touch base with in today's time. Most of the writings are outdated, and don't bear any meaning to the current situation because things have changed over time. The thing that differentiates the Qur'an from the other books, is that it has parts to it that still are relevant to our time. My way of proving there IS a God (Islamic God), is through his writings in the Qur'an. Muslims believe that the Qur'an came straight from God. Also, the Qur'an has never been changed - it is the same exact in every single copy you can ever find - dating from the oldest Qur'an to the newest Qur'an off the prints. Unlike the Bible, the Qur'an does not have versions - so interpretations are not different in different countries because of language. The Qur'an is written in only one language - and that is Arabic. Now - in the Qur'an - there are many chapters that specifically point out details that could never be known at the time the Qur'an was introduced. Things like how a child is created - from conception, to birth - it reads with detail that could never be known at that time. How can someone like the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) know what a fetus was, and how it developed. How would he ever know that sperm and egg came together to form a zygote which later multiplies to a fetus, and than over 9 months grows. In the Qur'an - there is a chapter that, in detail, chronologically lists each step of how a baby is created in the womb of a mother. Not only that - but there are multiple chapters that deal with Astronomy, Botany, Anatomy, and many more scientific subjects. In my defense, I beleive in God (Islamic God) for many reasons, not only because of science; however, to someone who does not believe in God...this way of proving that God exists through science is, in my opinion, the best way. So....there is a God, and I do believe in evolution, but evolution could not be possible without the will and power of God.

 

[Justice]

I would like to have the source cited that states that the Big Bang couldn't have happened long enough ago for evolution to occur. That seems like it would be rather incalculable... we only can see the limits of the universe through spectroscopy. The limits would show up as a red, which has been getting farther away.To say that evolution has never been proven and shown in experiments is... at the very least misleading. Several scientists have added or removed chromosomes in plant life. I would say that it's a pretty good validation of a theory when you can actually manipulate the building blocks of genetic code. Mutations are something that we can see in the world around us. People don't realize that it's a big part of evolution... new genetic code (most mutations are negative to survival, and many times are eliminated from the gene pool, but that doesn't mean none of them survive) creates new phenotypes. We can also see evolution in bacteria... people have been using all these damn antibiotics for years because doctors prescribe them to anybody. Then what happens? You guessed it, suddenly all the bacteria can survive.edit: I also wanted to say something about genetic engineering. Hitler basically had it right with the whole superhumans thing. Years after the Nazi regime, the Germans pretty much killed us at swimming after being useless in previous Olympics. Just an example of us being able to manipulate genetic code.I don't take Darwin as gospel. The guy made some strides in learning about how populations change, but he by no means knew what we know today about evolution and biology. Not only that, but there were other scientists around the world that were also looking into evolution when he was writing The Origin of Species. It's not like he was this one guy that had a crazy idea. It was something that was found by many people through science and logic.I will give you the part about the creation of life. Fact is, we don't know how life could have been created. However, that doesn't really directly relate to evolution... evolution describes the genetic changes of our genetic material, not how it was created. The interesting part of that experiment is just that something resembling DNA could even be created from a bunch of chemicals.And for the last time, man didn't evolve from apes. another edit: I'd also like to know how freaking pretentious humans are. Christians really think that we are SO well designed, which is pretty... interesting to say the least. The mortality rate in many foreign countries is about 1/10 or even 1/5. That only includes babies that are actually born, not miscarriages. A lot of our anatomy is either unnecessary or poorly designed, assuming it was designed. We aren't particularly agile compared to most animals. Our knees are not the most efficient things imaginable. Anyway, most animals can survive, and I guess that's what matters to Christians. However, some of them are downright retarded. If they were designed, well then, heh heh, God has some sense of humor.

 

[ReppinTheD]

come onnnn someone reply!!!

 

[Memphology]

I completely agree, although I have christian beliefs. IMO, Muslims, Christians and Jews are all worshipping the same god...theres certain major things (Jesus not being the savior to jews, mohammed not being a prophet to christians and jews etc.)but our religion is from the same roots and groups interpreted certain things different. But I do believe that God works scientificly. Unfortunely, theres not quite a major christion domination for that. Im actually thinking of going to a mosque for the experience and see what I can learn from a different aspect.

 

[l?ckdown]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BluffCityBlue @ Jun 15 2007, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I completely agree, although I have christian beliefs. IMO, Muslims, Christians and Jews are all worshipping the same god...theres certain major things (Jesus not being the savior to jews, mohammed not being a prophet to christians and jews etc.)but our religion is from the same roots and groups interpreted certain things different. But I do believe that God works scientificly. Unfortunely, theres not quite a major christion domination for that. Im actually thinking of going to a mosque for the experience and see what I can learn from a different aspect.</div>Well, it would be really hard for the Bible, and Torah to all of a sudden add Muhammad(SAW) to the books, since he and the Quran came afterwards, so I cannot blame them for that.The fact of the matter is, just because you may have some speculation that the original texts of the holy books may have been altered (except the Quran), doesn't mean that if ONE thing was altered from the original text, does not mean that it is not in its a somewhat true form. Micro organisms were the first forms of life on the planet, but where did they come from? Organisms, no matter how simple, do not just appear out of nowhere

 

[Memphology]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (l?ckdown @ Jun 15 2007, 03:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well, it would be really hard for the Bible, and Torah to all of a sudden add Muhammad(SAW) to the books, since he and the Quran came afterwards, so I cannot blame them for that.The fact of the matter is, just because you may have some speculation that the original texts of the holy books may have been altered (except the Quran), doesn't mean that if ONE thing was altered from the original text, does not mean that it is not in its a somewhat true form. Micro organisms were the first forms of life on the planet, but where did they come from? Organisms, no matter how simple, do not just appear out of nowhere</div>I never said the Koran, Bible or Torah was altered, which I believe the King James Version of the Bible isnt 100% accurate...I do think that people interpreted things different which eventually built into very different beliefs. IMO, you see this between the three mono religions, and even within the religions.

 

[l?ckdown]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jun 13 2007, 06:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>another edit: I'd also like to know how freaking pretentious humans are. Christians really think that we are SO well designed, which is pretty... interesting to say the least. The mortality rate in many foreign countries is about 1/10 or even 1/5. That only includes babies that are actually born, not miscarriages. A lot of our anatomy is either unnecessary or poorly designed, assuming it was designed. We aren't particularly agile compared to most animals. Our knees are not the most efficient things imaginable. Anyway, most animals can survive, and I guess that's what matters to Christians. However, some of them are downright retarded. If they were designed, well then, heh heh, God has some sense of humor.</div>I really can't agree with that, you can't give a wide accusation against an entire people. People from other countries (Lets say america) will go to another foreign country (Mexico int his case.) They are advised not to drink the water over there, for the bacteria can lead to sickness. However, the locals in that area can drink it, and not be sick at all. The Human body gets used to things, which is a feat in itself. It isn't static in the way it handles things. The Human Body just hasn't been exposed to that kind of bacteria or virus. After awhile, if the person from America chooses to say longer, he or she will be able to consume the water without being sick. Bacteria is different in different parts of the world, and is always changing, hence the new dose of flu vaccines every year. The body can only do so many things with what it has available. Humans don't need to be agile (in the current state of the world). We use other things, that can make the living conditions more suitable and comfortable. That in itself, is being the most adapt to the environment. Animals can't make an air conditioner or vaccine, if they are hot, or sick. Humans can literally alter the environment (with available resources, sadly this is not the case in most parts of the world), using their brains to make things that will help them,I think God has made a very incredible creature, with none like it so far.

 

[Justice]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (l?ckdown @ Jun 15 2007, 03:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I really can't agree with that, you can't give a wide accusation against an entire people. People from other countries (Lets say america) will go to another foreign country (Mexico int his case.) They are advised not to drink the water over there, for the bacteria can lead to sickness. However, the locals in that area can drink it, and not be sick at all. The Human body gets used to things, which is a feat in itself. It isn't static in the way it handles things. The Human Body just hasn't been exposed to that kind of bacteria or virus. After awhile, if the person from America chooses to say longer, he or she will be able to consume the water without being sick. Bacteria is different in different parts of the world, and is always changing, hence the new dose of flu vaccines every year. The body can only do so many things with what it has available. Humans don't need to be agile (in the current state of the world). We use other things, that can make the living conditions more suitable and comfortable. That in itself, is being the most adapt to the environment. Animals can't make an air conditioner or vaccine, if they are hot, or sick. Humans can literally alter the environment (with available resources, sadly this is not the case in most parts of the world), using their brains to make things that will help them,I think God has made a very incredible creature, with none like it so far.</div>The reason that I make an accusation like that is because it is an idea that is inherent to Christianity and intelligent design. God creates man in his image. God is perfect. However, man is not. A lot of Christianity is hinged on the principle that man is well-made and he designed this world with purpose and, obviously, intelligence. However, in many anatomical structures, there appears to be no design present. That is my point.Yes, you are pointing out something that actually has to do with evolution. Our bodies do not protect against everything, they just protect against things that we must be protected against. Remember when the Spanish came over to the New World and all the Natives died? Yeah, that was because they didn't have resistance to disease. It's not like the Queen of Spain said, "Haha, we should send over all the guys that are immune to this disease. That would be funny!" They just had resistance as a product of many years of evolution, while the Natives did not. The same thing happens today in Africa with malaria and other diseases.Once again, we seem to be in agreement. You are basically saying that while we do not have the physical capabilities to say, outrun a bear or a cheetah, we do have the intelligence to put them in a cage. I agree with that. We cannot, however, control hurricanes, global warming (not as much as people think, anyway), etc., which could possibly be the end of us. We also still can't control life and death, there's many diseases we can't cure, we can't get a 12 year old through a pregnancy safely, etc. In some respects, we are not wonderful creatures. We struggle to survive. Whether or not you think God is behind it, I suppose that is your decision. I'm not trying to claim that we have to be genetically perfect to live in our world, I'm merely pointing out that we are barely making it by in this world. Perhaps not today, but at some point in time, I do believe that we could have been extinct.You can believe that we are great, incredible creatures, but truly our brain capacity is not that much better than most other primates and even certain animals without a vertebral column. Certainly, you must at least admit that there are humans that are dumber than monkeys or apes. It's not a nice thing to say, but it is true. It makes sense to me that (in a pre-AC/heating world) smart humans would survive while unintelligent humans would die.

 

[l?ckdown]

So by saying that if we cannot control the weather, that we are not a very advanced creature? Primates are at best as smart as a young child, and those are the gifted ones. They can have some sort of memory, but as you said, we didn't directly evolve from them, so that's besides the point.And no, unless they are mentally retarded or have some injury that makes them less than capacity, I don't think that. IQ does not directly mean intelligence. The intelligent quotient measures cognitive ability, but is very biased on how it measures. The test is only giving out a few types of scenarios and factors. If the testee is not certainly gifted in these questions, they will grade a lower test, even though a person with a higher grade, may not be entirely more intelligent. The average man (usually) has a wider spectrum as to what is intelligence. These tests only grade what is thought of as "intelligence" (problem solving, reasoning) While those are part of intelligence, so is much more. The ability to have a certain character about you, to comprehend all of that you know into one "trait" (charming, rude) is very smart. An ape will show some sorts of character, some will be nice to someone, and another ape will not. That is why the apes and primates are very intelligent, but to even say that a primate is more intelligent than a regular human is just ridiculous IMO.Not being able to cure a disease? I'm sorry but that takes some time as well. The Tuberculosis cases were not stopped by evolution as we are talking about. It was done by the evolution of medicine, done by, you know it, the human brain. It takes many, many,many years for a positive gene in evolution to be widespread (to be immune to diseases), and the recent medical breakthroughs are not short of miraculous. I am not saying we are perfect creatures, if everything was perfect, we wouldn't need to consume food, we would make our own like plants, and could live without air, could fly, and do all sort of stuff we cannot do, (and wish we could).I can see at you getting angry at some crazy, literal Christians, but to say that every person that is religious thinks that the human is perfect is far from the truth. The world isn't perfect, and we aren't as well. However, we are the most advanced species on earth, thus our rise to prominence.

 

[Justice]

I don't get what you're even arguing about. I never said we should be able to control weather. I'm merely making a point that counters the argument that we basically are made to rule over animals and the world. It is strange that people think that there is a God above us inflicting pain and anguish over a bunch of black people, but I suppose people have the right to think that.I similarly have no idea where you're going with the IQ part. I never made any claim about measuring intelligence by using a test. I merely said that there are people that as intelligent as species which we might consider of "lower intelligence." Like I said, you are one of those who is very pretentious. You base your claims on what you see and not common sense. My point is just that it is conceivable that humans and other primates come from a common ancestor. I don't think that is a ridiculous claim. I never made any claim of a "regular" (whatever that means) human's intelligence being equal or less than another primate's.Tuberculosis was not stopped by evolution, because it is not something that can be stopped by evolution (edit: I should say that it's extremely unlikely, but you get the picture). This isn't an argument of evolution vs. medicine, not to me anyway. I'm not sure why you went on a tangent about that. What makes you think that any medical breakthrough is a miracle, anyway?I never made any claim that EVERY religious person believes that we are perfect beings. I would love to see any quote where I said that. I merely made the point that Christianity (that's one religion) hinges on the idea that we (and animals, ha) are intelligently designed. Instead, I am suggesting that our environment (which under Christianity, would also be created by God) is very hostile and doesn't exactly fit us like a glove. I do think it's acceptable to consider ourselves as a very intelligent species. However, your claim that we are "the most advanced species" is questionable at best. What makes you consider us the most advanced species?

 

[l?ckdown]

[quote name='Justice']Tuberculosis was not stopped by evolution, because it is not something that can be stopped by evolution (edit: I should say that it's extremely unlikely, but you get the picture). This isn't an argument of evolution vs. medicine, not to me anyway. I'm not sure why you went on a tangent about that. What makes you think that any medical breakthrough is a miracle, anyway?[/quote]What I am trying to say is, how can you not say that we are the most advanced organism on this planet (or that we know of)? Seriously now, what other thing can do what we do. The medicine was just an example of how advanced we are. We are not the fastest or even the strongest organism, yet we still rose to prominence by using our brains. We altered the environment, so that we can become more fit to it. The environment that is more comfortable to a human may not be very beneficial to another organism, thus they have to leave, or try to adapt. Not saying that Humans are the only ones that can adapt, all animals do, but the things that we can change to make it more easier to live does make us the most advanced creature. Being the strongest or the fastest thing on the world does not make you the most advanced, neither does having a combination. Seriously a monkey more advanced?[quote name='Justice']We cannot, however, control hurricanes, global warming (not as much as people think, anyway), etc., which could possibly be the end of us. We also still can't control life and death, there's many diseases we can't cure, we can't get a 12 year old through a pregnancy safely, etc. In some respects, we are not wonderful creatures.[/quote]Why do you think that if we cannot become impeccable to any other thing that threatens our survival, that we are not "wonderful". I went on about the medical cures for that statement. Like I said, it takes time. We are not perfect, like we both are in agreement with. The IQ part was to tell that the tests they do on primates to show their IQ, and even our IQ are not total fact. They are more ballpark estimates. To say that a primate is more intelligent than an average human, is what YOU see, not common sense. You saying that we cannot cure this and that, omg we cant do this yet. What are you trying to achieve for the human race, for them to be perfect?. What in you're eyes makes something "wonderful"? I'm sorry, but being "advanced and wonderful beings" does not make them perfect. I never said that Humans are perfect, nothing will ever be "perfect". You keep on giving these examples about how we are not that great. Why can't you look at all the positive stuff that we have done. sh*t, even the internet is a great advancement. Do you see any other things making computers, and being able to link up with people around the world. I don't know how you are saying that saying we are the most advanced species on Earth is questionable. Tell me this, what do you think is more advanced than us?[quote name='Justice']I never made any claim of a "regular" (whatever that means) human's intelligence being equal or less than another primate's.[/quote]Regular in this sense, is a person who is not mentally retarded and has a brain that is not damaged, thus making them like most people.[quote name='Justice']Certainly, you must at least admit that there are humans that are dumber than monkeys or apes. It's not a nice thing to say, but it is true. It makes sense to me that (in a pre-AC/heating world) smart humans would survive while unintelligent humans would die.[/quote]Yes, mentally retarded humans, can have a lower intelligence, but a regular human compared to a regular healthy primate, the Human will be more intelligent. [quote name='Justice']Like I said, you are one of those who is very pretentious[/quote]lol, trying to get a lil personal attack or something?

But seriously, I can see where you are coming from. I never, ever said it was wrong to think that we come from a common ancestor, it's what you think.