More than a little head - they have bodies

[joconnor424]

Okay, first of all, don't patronize me. You're just another asshole on an internet forum. Never forget that.

once again, based on what measure? ability create a tool? ability to ponder one's own existence? self awareness? ability to manipulate the world around them? ability to add 2+2?

side point: i say i'm smarter than you, thus i'll make up my own test and you'll be judged by it.

Your side point doesn't make sense. I'm comparing two different species. Sadly, you and I are of the same species. Try again.

What other measure matters? If we evolved to this point, then we must compare other species to this same point in our evolutionary tale. If we evolved from fish, land born creatures, apes, etc etc then we must compare those species to us. Once again, why did we get to this point but those other species not? We all came from the same pool, apparently.

what? by "our present state" you're referring to this special lucky state you think we attained, i take it? is the implication, then that - in a world based on evolution being true - all animals would ultimately end up at the intelligent state we are at now? please tell me that's not where you're going with that.
this question highlights your ignorance on the topic. rate of evolution is not linear even within the same species, let alone across a range of species, and especially not over time. it's not a race and there is no linear string of development or adapations. there is no "goal" and we are certainly not the pinnacle of life. our state as the intelligent, self-aware organisms we are arose out of defined process of evolution whereby traits indicating intelligence were selected for by our environment.

Why are we most fit for our environment yet all other species are not?

once again, you're highlighting ignorance. we do not actively ADAPT to different environments. we use tools and cognitive ability to create circumstances and manipulate our surroundings which allows us to survive in extreme environments. just as for example primates and birds (Tool Use in Birds) use tools to succeed in their environments.

this question shows a clear misunderstanding of even just the word adaption, which is a very fundamental part of evolution. if you're unable to see the difference between what real adaption is and what you proposed - and why it's so fucking wrong - i'm not really sure what to say. This is basic level shit.

Of course we actively adapt. You're using the word in the primitive, animal, evolutionary definition. We adapt to our environments all the time. We adapt to situations. Adapt does not mean strictly morph or mutate. We adapt using cognitive thinking. See, this is what separates us from animals- we use our strongest trait to adapt without mutation or other physical changes.

emphasis mine. this should go without saying but your true intentions show through with this question. you've already decided what *is* and the answers i may or may not continue to provide will not affect that judgement.

You're absolutely right. Just as you've already drawn your own conclusion to this topic...

nevermind that you or the rest of those who believe we've been "given" anything have yet to put forth valid science-based arguments in favor of their ideas. rather it's been baseless proposals thrown in with elementary questions about evolution which they're hoping will reveal an A HA moment exposing the massive holes in evolution.

I can give you several examples of miracles that have been performed in our history, but you would debase them based on a lack of scientific evidence. So essentially you're applying your side point from earlier in this post that you yourself considered invalid.

do yourself a favor and watch the video above.

No thanks.

once again, you're failing to draw the distinction between abstract human ideas of "better" or "smarter" and fit or unfit. every other species on this planet is FIT for its respective environment or it will die or adaption and speciation will take place. there is no "ahead" or "behind".

Clearly there is. Our mere existence proves that.

 

[kingofsp]

Wait a second, we're the dominant species on this planet? You motherfuckers ever heard of the ocean?

Yeah we dominate our little 30% land mass, for the most part.

 

[joconnor424]

Absolutely we are. There isn't a species alive that we cannot handle. Shit, just by our accidents we can destroy the ocean.

 

[kingofsp]

Absolutely we are. There isn't a species alive that we cannot handle. Shit, just by our accidents we can destroy the ocean.

Lol. Well, we do destroy small parts of it. But we are only dominant in our environment, which means removing them from theirs. In the ocean we're totally fucked, and the ocean is the vast majority of the Earth.

 

[guerilla]

@kingofsp

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_An7Dj1w_gU]Fishing with Dynamite - YouTube[/ame]

 

[joconnor424]

it's amazing to me that the uneducated will attempt to espouse opinions on a topic they know quite literally nothing about.

I feel sorry for you. Your mind is filled with so much knowledge that you have no room for humility.

I take it you never talk about politics then? Or sports? Or any other topic you have no experience with? Sure.

 

[lukep]

I'm open to good information about evolution. I don't see much of it.

Did you see this short BBC doc on how Cooking made us human?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf_OWun4Y04]Did Cooking Make Us Human ? (BBC Documentary) - YouTube[/ame]

Someone posted it here a month ago, can't remember who, and it blew my mind... It's hard to believe that putting fire under your food makes so much difference, but it really does... Energy to do stuff, time to do it in, reasons to build our brains, new problems to overcome, new social situations we didn't have before, and most importantly; it allowed us to carry around far less Gut, making us vastly more mobile.

If you care about the incentives behind what created us, this is the best documentary on the planet about evolution by far.

 

[Moxie]

If we evolved to this point, then we must compare other species to this same point in our evolutionary tale. If we evolved from fish, land born creatures, apes, etc etc then we must compare those species to us. Once again, why did we get to this point but those other species not? We all came from the same pool, apparently.

JerseyJoe mentioned niches. The earth has various environments and conditions, just like internet marketing has various niches. Members of a species can be mobile and can cross into different areas, just like marketers can go to different niches.

The weight loss niche is attractive because of the rewards, but because of that it is harder to survive in. Those that do survive in it though may end up "stronger" than people that stay in other niches.


"There are countless ecological opportunities under water, which is why fish still exist. When the earliest ancestors of modern amphibians left the water, they found many new opportunities on land. As amphibians and other land creatures diversified, however, fewer and fewer opportunities existed for newcomers."

Evolution: Frequently Asked Questions


The more people that get into the weight loss niche, the less opportunity. All the other niches combined though still have lots of opportunity, just like the ocean does for fish.

Why are we most fit for our environment yet all other species are not?

Humans are fragile in many ways. Ants, turtles, and cockroaches have been around over 100 million years.

3 Reasons Why Cockroaches Would Make Excellent Entrepreneurs

Of course we actively adapt. You're using the word in the primitive, animal, evolutionary definition. We adapt to our environments all the time. We adapt to situations. Adapt does not mean strictly morph or mutate. We adapt using cognitive thinking. See, this is what separates us from animals- we use our strongest trait to adapt without mutation or other physical changes.

Not all humans have the same cognitive thinking abilities. Are you familiar with the movie Idiocracy? It's a humorous take on what might happen if the "dumber" people continue to be those that reproduce the most.

In the wild, assuming two apes are the same physical strength, it would be the "smarter" one that would be more likely to survive and thus more likely to produce offspring. This over time could increase the average amount of neurons in a member of the species.

Scientists Show How a Gene Duplication Helped Our Brains Become ‘Human’ | Neuroscience News

The human brain is not static. It can literally change depending on how it is used. Watch the video below with neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga :

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dadT-14FkSY]Michael Gazzaniga - What We Are - YouTube[/ame]

I take it you never talk about politics then? Or sports?

Do you go on baseball forums and ask if Babe Ruth hit a lot of home runs? The answer to that is easily available. If you are going to be opinionated about who was the greatest baseball player or whatever, most would assume that you are already familiar with the basics.

The answers to some of the questions you are asking are taught to schoolchildren and are available on numerous websites.

 

[rusvik]

In one millon years no chimpanzee will have figured out how to make fire, count on it.

 

[guerilla]

I like that a few more people chimed in, it's nice to see I am not the only person who has reservations about the theory of evolution.

 

[brandonbaker]

Are we really debating the validity of evolution in this thread?

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Moxie]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh9XL08Akwc]Chimpanzee tool usage: A whole tool kit - YouTube[/ame]

 

[guerilla]

Are we really debating the validity of evolution in this thread?

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most of the fossils shown are not considered direct ancestors to Homo sapiens but are closely related to direct ancestors and are therefore important to the study of the lineage.

Internet is hard!

 

[brandonbaker]

Internet is hard!

What? It's simply saying that the page not only includes details on our evolutionary ancestors, but also our evolutionary cousins. It's a bonus, not a caveat.

 

[rusvik]

Chimpanzee tool usage: A whole tool kit - YouTube

Stick used to eat ants =| Space travel

 

[brandonbaker]

In one millon years no chimpanzee will have figured out how to make fire, count on it.

The end result of evolution isn't to become human.

Hold on, what's your point anyway?

 

[MSTeacher]

Fishing with Dynamite - YouTube

I was on a framing crew with a guy named Veun Chun who escaped the Khmer Rouge and fled to the US when he was seventeen. He had to trek through eighty miles of jungle and warzone to get to the mission point that brought him out of the country. He made the trip alone with nothing but a bunch of dynamite and a steel plate with a welded handle that he'd hold to the side when crossing hot zones. He stayed alive by fishing with the dynamite he carried.

He has since evolved into an alien because he was the most fit on the framing crew.

 

[rusvik]

The end result of evolution isn't to become human.

Hold on, what's your point anyway?

I was supposed to a humorous take on the whole 'humans aren't special' nonsense. Humans are an entirely unique species compared to all other animals. Given one million more years, evolution would say some other new species would have evolved to counter the threat of humans, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[brandonbaker]

Given one million more years, evolution would say some other new species would have evolved to counter the threat of humans, but somehow I doubt it.

Evolution wouldn't make any such claim.

Dinosaurs lasted for 150 million years before being wiped out. Some sea creatures have lasted for even more than that. Evolution doesn't predict the future. It's just a mechanism of genetic change given a set of prerequisite conditions, namely, random genetic mutation and non-random genetic survival.

 

[rusvik]

My issue with evolution is not natural selection with making sub-species, but the extent that natural selection can explain the huge diversity in different species. I simply can't buy into the single cell into everything else theory.