Atheism: The Great Nothing!

[PolyHedral]

...Um, have we? We've argued that man is genetically similar to apes, which is entirely true and not at all the same thing.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Many evolutionist have tried to argue that humans are 99% simular chemically to apes, and I agree that blood precipitation test do actually indicate that the chimpanzee is our closest relative. Yet reguarding that we must also then accept the following;

Milk chemistry test indicates that the Donkey is mans closest relative.

Cholestrol level test indicate that the Garter Snake is mans closest relative.

Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the Chicken is mans closest relative.

Listen, on the basics of another recent blood chemistry test, the Butter Bean is mans closest relative.

I consider such things as baseless induendo, just useless speculation and unreliable at best.

And I am not going for it.

Peace.

By definition, humans ARE primates. We share common habits, have similar bone structure, not to mention common DNA. That is completely different from the chemical makeup of human milk. Genetics and chemistry are two entirely different sciences.

 

[mickiel]

By definition, humans ARE primates. We share common habits, have similar bone structure, not to mention common DNA. That is completely different from the chemical makeup of human milk. Genetics and chemistry are two entirely different sciences.

Humans are not primates in my view, we are entirely new emergents in that Consciousness governs our behavior, not instincts. I agree we share many things with animals, but we are simply not of their generate. No conjunction of an animals chemical makeup could produce a human, and vice versa. I believe that the mateing of an animal with an animal, could only produce an animal, and so it is with humans.

Explain to me how you can compare the two, combine them in your belief, but neither could produce the other?

Peace.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Humans are not primates in my view, we are entirely new emergents in that Consciousness governs our behavior, not instincts. I agree we share many things with animals, but we are simply not of their generate. No conjunction of an animals chemical makeup could produce a human, and vice versa. I believe that the mateing of an animal with an animal, could only produce an animal, and so it is with humans.

Explain to me how you can compare the two, combine them in your belief, but neither could produce the other?

Peace.

That's like saying because two orangutans can't make a chimpanzee that chimps aren't apes. I really don't see where you're going with this.

 

[PolyHedral]

...we are entirely new emergents in that Consciousness governs our behavior...

Define consciousness.

 

[Revoltingest]

The title is all wrong.
Atheism is just a "pretty good" nothing.
(Although some agnostics consider it only a "fair to middling" nothing.)

 

[mickiel]

That's like saying because two orangutans can't make a chimpanzee that chimps aren't apes. I really don't see where you're going with this.

If humans were animals then we could mate with animals and give birth to them. We cannot. Explain to me why we cannot give birth to animals, yet you claim we are animals?

Peace.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

If humans were animals then we could mate with animals and give birth to them. We cannot. Explain to me why we cannot give birth to animals, yet you claim we are animals?

Peace.

The same reason dogs can't give birth to cats. They're both animals in your opinion, are they not?

 

[mickiel]

The same reason dogs can't give birth to cats. They're both animals in your opinion, are they not?

Well I agree with that point of view, but animals have multiple forms of life, humans only have one same common form.

Explain why that difference.

Peace.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Well I agree with that point of view, but animals have multiple forms of life, humans only have one same common form.

Explain why that difference.

Peace.

Because humans are one of the "multiple forms of life" of animals...

 

[mickiel]

Because humans are one of the "multiple forms of life" of animals...

There is only one type of human, yet many types of animals, that within itself is defened difference.

You must admit to this.

Peace.

 

[Meow Mix]

There is only one type of human, yet many types of animals, that within itself is defened difference.

You must admit to this.

Peace.

There wasn't always just one type of human.

Homo sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo floriensis, just to name a few -- some of which existed at the same time as others, such as H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis, and H. floriensis lived at the same time as either H. habilis or H. erectus, I don't remember which.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

There is only one type of human, yet many types of animals, that within itself is defened difference.

You must admit to this.

Peace.

There is one type of human because humans are one type of animal. I don't see why this is so hard to grasp...

 

[mickiel]

There is one type of human because humans are one type of animal. I don't see why this is so hard to grasp...

I feel the same way about your view of this, why is it so hard for you to grasp that the human experience is subjective to a host of things not assoicated with animals; hopes, fears, knowledge, thrills, tickles, pleasures, distresses, desires, creations, none of which can be experienced by animals.

Our sympathy and identification with other living things, our ability to " See into the Consciousness of others", how we can imagine how others feel. Humans have psychology, animals have no such thing.

Peace.

 

[CarlinKnew]

hopes, fears, knowledge, thrills, tickles, pleasures, distresses, desires, creations, none of which can be experienced by animals.

thanks for the chuckle

funny stuff

 

[DeitySlayer]

There is only one type of human, yet many types of animals, that within itself is defened difference.

You must admit to this.

Peace.

There is one type of lion, yet many types of animals, that within itself is a defined difference. Therefore lions aren't animals.

Your logic is so astonishingly empty.

 

[DeitySlayer]

I feel the same way about your view of this, why is it so hard for you to grasp that the human experience is subjective to a host of things not assoicated with animals; hopes, fears, knowledge, thrills, tickles, pleasures, distresses, desires, creations, none of which can be experienced by animals.

Our sympathy and identification with other living things, our ability to " See into the Consciousness of others", how we can imagine how others feel. Humans have psychology, animals have no such thing.

Peace.

If you believe that animals are not subject to fear, pleasure, distress, desire or thrills, you are seriously challenged.

Also, I would like to point out that the severely mentally retarded cannot do any of the above. By your definition, they are not human.

 

[mickiel]

If you believe that animals are not subject to fear, pleasure, distress, desire or thrills, you are seriously challenged.

Also, I would like to point out that the severely mentally retarded cannot do any of the above. By your definition, they are not human.

In my view, it is seriously challanged to accept that humans are even continious with the idiot hierarchies of speechless apes, animals cannot talk nor have language, the chasm between humans and animals is awesome.

Yet we have those who would blend these vast differences together, which I think is worse than religion. What religion has done to the world, this belief that humans are animals has done worse.

Peace.

 

[PolyHedral]

animals cannot talk nor have language,

There has been about a decade's worth of research into the language of prairie wolfs. And apes have been taught ASL.

 

[mickiel]

There has been about a decade's worth of research into the language of prairie wolfs. And apes have been taught ASL.

No matter what spaced out reason you have in your mind, animals do not speak with verbal language as humans have. No verbs or nouns, no spoken communication that all could understand.

Peace.