Evidence For And Against Evolution

[Subduction Zone]

I am speaking of one thing -- the huge differences in cognitive ability between humans and any other form of life, especially in the thinking process about death.
Again, it's similar to the evidence that the sun is hot. Apes and dogs do not have written documentary reflecting their thoughts and history so as to transmit to others. Only humans do. And, there is evidence that humans pray and are thinking of death on a fairly regular basis. There is no evidence to prove currently or in the past that animals have that fear expressed throughout their lifetime built in on a long term basis. We know many animals have instinctive fear at the evident imminent presentation of being killed. But there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that they think about death until the spectre of sudden death may be imposed upon them in many instances. The evidence is similar to that of concluding that the sun is hot.

It really is not that large. All you have now is a argument based upon an error.

Also, I would suggest that you learn what evidence is. You still have none.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am speaking of one thing -- the huge differences in cognitive ability between humans and any other form of life, especially in the thinking process about death.
Again, it's similar to the evidence that the sun is hot. Apes and dogs do not have written documentary reflecting their thoughts and history so as to transmit to others. Only humans do. And, there is evidence that humans pray and are thinking of death on a fairly regular basis. There is no evidence to prove currently or in the past that animals have that fear expressed throughout their lifetime built in on a long term basis. We know many animals have instinctive fear at the evident imminent presentation of being killed. But there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that they think about death until the spectre of sudden death may be imposed upon them in many instances. The evidence is similar to that of concluding that the sun is hot.

It really is not that large. All you have now is a argument based upon an error.

Also, I would suggest that you learn what evidence is. You still have none.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you believe that nonsense? You are only digging the hole deeper.

The hole is really wide, vast, and deep between the cognitive ability of humans and any other being. Again, evolution cannot explain the vast realm of difference in thinking ability. One can pass it off by saying, "Well, that's the way it evolved," but there is absolutely no extant (or dead) proof of that.
And I will mention again only humans ponder over the meaning of life, wondering what happens when they die. Animals don't wonder about that. They don't think or imagine about evolution, or their origins. They don't have the ability to wonder about that. Why is that? Because God did not give it to them. Job 39 is very interesting, I enjoyed reading it again.

 

[YoursTrue]

It really is not that large. All you have now is a argument based upon an error.

Also, I would suggest that you learn what evidence is. You still have none.

Again, it seems at this point you are the one refusing to acknowledge or admit evidence. Let's pretend for the moment you did not believe in evolution. What then? Would you be able to admit "scientifically" (that is, impartially based on evidence) that apes do not wonder, worry, or think about death and what happens when they die?

 

[SkepticThinker]

The hole is really wide, vast, and deep between the cognitive ability of humans and any other being. Again, evolution cannot explain the vast realm of difference in thinking ability. One can pass it off by saying, "Well, that's the way it evolved," but there is absolutely no extant (or dead) proof of that.
And I will mention again only humans ponder over the meaning of life, wondering what happens when they die. Animals don't wonder about that. They don't think or imagine about evolution, or their origins. They don't have the ability to wonder about that. Why is that? Because God did not give it to them. Job 39 is very interesting, I enjoyed reading it again.

How do you know what animals think about?

 

[ratiocinator]

Again, evolution cannot explain the vast realm of difference in thinking ability.

How did you reach that conclusion?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The hole is really wide, vast, and deep between the cognitive ability of humans and any other being. Again, evolution cannot explain the vast realm of difference in thinking ability. One can pass it off by saying, "Well, that's the way it evolved," but there is absolutely no extant (or dead) proof of that.
And I will mention again only humans ponder over the meaning of life, wondering what happens when they die. Animals don't wonder about that. They don't think or imagine about evolution, or their origins. They don't have the ability to wonder about that. Why is that? Because God did not give it to them. Job 39 is very interesting, I enjoyed reading it again.

What makes you think that? Simply claiming it does no good at all. And why do you think that evolution cannot explain it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How did you reach that conclusion?

I think it is simply a comforting mantra to repeat.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again, it seems at this point you are the one refusing to acknowledge or admit evidence. Let's pretend for the moment you did not believe in evolution. What then? Would you be able to admit "scientifically" (that is, impartially based on evidence) that apes do not wonder, worry, or think about death and what happens when they die?

No, you made the claims, you need to support them with evidence. We probably have to go back over the basics. For scientific evidence you first need to have a testable concept before you can even claim to have evidence. So when it comes to your claims, what is your model? What possible reasonable test could show it to be wrong? You need to answer these before even beginning to claim that you have evidence.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you believe that nonsense? You are only digging the hole deeper.

Reviewing your response, I ask: do you believe or think that animals think during their lifetimes, what happens when they die?

 

[YoursTrue]

No, you made the claims, you need to support them with evidence. We probably have to go back over the basics. For scientific evidence you first need to have a testable concept before you can even claim to have evidence. So when it comes to your claims, what is your model? What possible reasonable test could show it to be wrong? You need to answer these before even beginning to claim that you have evidence.

Now it seems what you're claiming is what could be called a strawman argument. What model do you have to show that humans evolved to wonder, unlike their predecessors, what happens at death? And that during their lifetimes as soon as they become aware of the situation called 'death.' Do you have any evidence showing beyond conjecture that these thoughts evolved when humans supposedly emerged by 'natural selection' from their apelike ancestors? no...
Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, unless you have more evidence, babies of the human kind do not wonder what happens when/if they die. They grow into that sort of wonderment. How about apes? Do you think they wonder about these things as they grow older?
Oh, and p.s., the evidence is like that of the sun being hot. We feel it, we figure it's hot. What about animals? Is there any evidence to support the idea that they think about what happens when they die? (again -- no -- )

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you believe that nonsense? You are only digging the hole deeper.

Have horses in battle written about their fear of being hurt or death if they survive the battle? After all, when kings and men went to battle with swords and horses, men could write about it. Could horses?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Reviewing your response, I ask: do you believe or think that animals think during their lifetimes, what happens when they die?

The same thing that happens to us. Dead is dead. Tell me, did you miss existing before you were born?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now it seems what you're claiming is what could be called a strawman argument. What model do you have to show that humans evolved to wonder, unlike their predecessors, what happens at death? And that during their lifetimes as soon as they become aware of the situation called 'death.' Do you have any evidence showing beyond conjecture that these thoughts evolved when humans supposedly emerged by 'natural selection' from their apelike ancestors? no...
Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, unless you have more evidence, babies of the human kind do not wonder what happens when/if they die. They grow into that sort of wonderment. How about apes? Do you think they wonder about these things as they grow older?
Oh, and p.s., the evidence is like that of the sun being hot. We feel it, we figure it's hot. What about animals? Is there any evidence to support the idea that they think about what happens when they die? (again -- no -- )

I don't think that you are ready for logical fallacies yet. Right now you are trying to shift the burden of proof. You made various claims. That puts the burden of proof upon you. We can talk about emergent properties later.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have horses in battle written about their fear of being hurt or death if they survive the battle? After all, when kings and men went to battle with swords and horses, men could write about it. Could horses?

I don't know, why don't you go to the source of course?

They do seem to have some concerns that you did not bring up.

 

[ratiocinator]

Now it seems what you're claiming is what could be called a strawman argument. What model do you have to show that humans evolved to wonder, unlike their predecessors, what happens at death?

The model is evolution. There is plentiful evidence that humans did evolve and also that human brains are not qualitatively different from similar animals'. If you want to posit a fundamental difference difference, it's up to you to provide evidence.

How about apes? Do you think they wonder about these things as they grow older?

Humans are apes - and I have no idea what other apes wonder about - do you?

 

[YoursTrue]

@Subduction Zone -- This first paragraph in the wikipedia article makes it even better for conjectural posturing about the beginning of life, emerging of course, from the sea perhaps? Well let's see the reasoning from an evolutionary viewpoint about this -- death anxiety. Death anxiety (psychology) - Wikipedia
"Predatory death anxiety arises from the fear of being harmed."
Predatory death is obviously instinctive. Meaning that when an animal or human is about to be killed or hurt, it usually gets scared. That's obvious, like Dawkins said about the sun being hot. I remember when the teacher in my biology class said it's the "fight or flight" instinct. And, it makes sense. (But of course, now that I read Job chapter 39, and see about the fearless horses who can't figure they may die in battle, well, that puts a better light on it. Soldiers of the human kind know when they go to war they may die. I don't think they're particularly thrilled about this, do you? Yes, "death anixiety.")
Then the article makes the most absurd statement, as if the unicellular organisms had anxiety complexes. With receptors that evolved. They have evolved?? My, oh my, must have had lots and lots of unicellular organisms to "have evolved" responsive mechanisms. Etc. and more in the article. (wow is all I can say, and thanks for helping me to see this.)
"It is the most basic and oldest form of death anxiety, with its origins in the first unicellular organisms' set of adaptive resources." Notice the article says "failed verification" in conjunction with that thoughtful imagination. But they say it anyway.
"Unicellular organisms have receptors that have evolved to react to external dangers, along with self-protective, responsive mechanisms made to increase the likelihood of survival in the face of chemical and physical forms of attack or danger.[9]:616[failed verification]"
(I'll leave it there for the moment. Except for the fact that as a teenager I loved the book "Alice in Wonderland." And it grew curioser and curioser.)

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't know, why don't you go to the source of course?

They do seem to have some concerns that you did not bring up.

Thank you for (apparently) asserting you believe in talking horses. Have any spoken to you about death lately? Or have you read a book one or many horses have written (left behind?) about their musings about death? I never liked that show anyway, even before I knew what the Bible said. Some people do. Not me. I guess some are amused by it. I never was. Even before I believed in God and the Bible.

 

[YoursTrue]

OK, gotta go. Thanks for the discussion, Subduction Zone.

 

[YoursTrue]

It really is not that large. All you have now is a argument based upon an error.

Also, I would suggest that you learn what evidence is. You still have none.

Are you sure that the thinking ability difference between apes and humans isn't that large? Really? Let's take dogs, for example. They come when you call them. Sometimes. So they obviously (back to Dawkins' hot sun illustration as proof again) understand certain actions. But they still haven't figured to read and write, have they?