Evidence For And Against Evolution

[Dan From Smithville]

It depends on how one views it. And the Bible. I said how one views it. As I said, and I'm sticking to it right now because I don't see an escape clause, that little bit of dna difference makes a whole lot of difference in cognitive ability. The fact that no one knows how it got there doesn't mean someone will find out the mechanics of it later. Meaning the absolute difference of thinking and conceptional ability between man's so-called "closest" relative. So called.

I do not follow what you are trying to say here. Could you elaborate on this?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A biiiig difference. Along with use of language is ability to put imagination to action. And then, of course, the ability to record history. Not to say to do research. Those few little differences in genes somehow make a big difference in application.

How genes are regulated and copy number have an impact on the expressed characters too. For instance, dogs and wolves have an amylase gene, but dogs can have as many as 8 copies of the gene so that amylase is over-expressed in dogs compared to wolves. Since a dogs diet is generally higher in starch.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It also shows how mistakes in reasoning get passed down from generation to generation. This is likely part of how religious ritual gets developed: someone with OCD does a ritual and then *everyone* else starts to do that ritual.

Is religion a spandrel from this aspect of humanity?

Indeed. "magical thinking" / superstition is certainly also part of it.

The reasoning of the children is actually rather diverse when they are asked why they went through the full series of actions.

Some merely pointed to the "authority" factor. "he told me to do it", while fully realizing half the actions didn't contribute to the end result.
Others assumed that the seemingly pointless actions weren't pointless and that they just didn't understand why they did it, but did it anyway "just to be safe". Also in part because of the authority factor. If the adult tells you to do it - surely that adult has some reason to?


The hilarious conclusion of it all was that we humans grow up to be so smart because we are actually dumber then chimps.

A chimp instantly understands half the actions don't contribute. He doesn't question why the "adult" goes through a series of seemingly pointless steps. Nor does he wonder. He just skips. "Give me candy, NOW!"
The chimp is certain of of his case that he doesn't need to go through pointless actions.

The human is not! The human wonders why the figure of authority does it and reasons: "Surely there MUST be a reason! If I don't go through those actions, will I not get the candy? It seems I would get the candy though... but am I going to risk it? And is the leader going to get mad if I don't do exactly what he says? I'll just do the series exactly, just to be safe... that way I certainly get the candy and I won't anger the leader either!"


It's actually a minor psychological difference between humans and chimps. A minor difference, which has HUGE impact on how we grow up and how we accumulate knowledge. It also shows how easily humans can be tricked into blindly following perceived figures of authority.

EDIT: found a condensed version. this isn't the docu I saw, but it shows the same experiment.

 

[Polymath257]

The Bible says we will never know the end from the beginning. We can be fascinated by it, however, and God wants us to be. But we will never know all there is to know.

But you don't need to know *everything* in order to know *something*.

There is a LOT we do not know. But there are things we *do* know. And among the things we understand in some detail is how light is produced in matter.

 

[Polymath257]

Indeed. "magical thinking" / superstition is certainly also part of it.

The reasoning of the children is actually rather diverse when they are asked why they went through the full series of actions.

Some merely pointed to the "authority" factor. "he told me to do it", while fully realizing half the actions didn't contribute to the end result.
Others assumed that the seemingly pointless actions weren't pointless and that they just didn't understand why they did it, but did it anyway "just to be safe". Also in part because of the authority factor. If the adult tells you to do it - surely that adult has some reason to?


The hilarious conclusion of it all was that we humans grow up to be so smart because we are actually dumber then chimps.

A chimp instantly understands half the actions don't contribute. He doesn't question why the "adult" goes through a series of seemingly pointless steps. Nor does he wonder. He just skips. "Give me candy, NOW!"
The chimp is certain of of his case that he doesn't need to go through pointless actions.

The human is not! The human wonders why the figure of authority does it and reasons: "Surely there MUST be a reason! If I don't go through those actions, will I not get the candy? It seems I would get the candy though... but am I going to risk it? And is the leader going to get mad if I don't do exactly what he says? I'll just do the series exactly, just to be safe... that way I certainly get the candy and I won't anger the leader either!"


It's actually a minor psychological difference between humans and chimps. A minor difference, which has HUGE impact on how we grow up and how we accumulate knowledge. It also shows how easily humans can be tricked into blindly following perceived figures of authority.

EDIT: found a condensed version. this isn't the docu I saw, but it shows the same experiment.

I wonder if there is an age dependence in this study. What happens if you take *young* chimps or older human kids?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I wonder if there is an age dependence in this study. What happens if you take *young* chimps or older human kids?

Interesting point

 

[metis]

Einstein must have realized there were (are) intelligent forces way beyond his curious mind. His religious upbringing was not strong, although I am pretty sure he was a bit upset about prejudice.

He knew far more about religion than you suggest.

What he said he believed in he called "[Baruch] Spinoza's God", which was and is a naturalistic approach. To both, study of all and subsequent contemplation on what's learned were essential in trying to better understand of God. To them, science is more helpful than religion in this matter, which is an approach a great many of my Swedish relatives take. Needless to say, I also drift in that same direction, but not quite as far as they.

 

[Bear Wild]

So called.

So called because they are and you can come up with all of the meaningless. imaginative explanations you want but none will negate the truth. We are clearly genetically related and share so much biologically in common to deny it.

 

[Polymath257]

Interesting point

One reason I ask is that human evolution is an example of neotony: our adults look more like the young of other apes. That includes having a large brain for our size.

So I am especially curious if the young chimps 'follow the rules' more than the older ones.

 

[YoursTrue]

But you don't need to know *everything* in order to know *something*.

There is a LOT we do not know. But there are things we *do* know. And among the things we understand in some detail is how light is produced in matter.

I'm not saying it is impossible to 'know' certain things eventually, such as light bending. And this conversation has actually made me more interested in finding out what or how 'light' is produced, if it's emitted from a shining object - if beams of light are particles -- in deference, when I went to school I felt calculus was above me. Although I was a scholarship student, I merely memorized formulas, including those of the atomic type. I didn't understand it, I merely accepted what was taught. (Same with evolution, never questioned it until I was older.) I was into the arts. But now I am interested in light-bending, objects in the way of a beam, and what does light beam consist of, how does it get started. Yup, it sure can be interesting. Everlasting life is certainly in the mind of most humans -- considering most of us want to keep learning. (I doubt chimpanzees have that same re-cognition. )
I still think that there is 'a' supreme Being with intelligence that causes life to exist outside of Himself. Of course, using the male gender to describe God is simply a way that the Bible describes Him. And I accept that, even though I am not a male.
Still happy (most of the time) to be alive, looking forward to the future.

 

[YoursTrue]

One reason I ask is that human evolution is an example of neotony: our adults look more like the young of other apes. That includes having a large brain for our size.

So I am especially curious if the young chimps 'follow the rules' more than the older ones.

hmm I don't think that works into the equation we are discussing here. Naturally young ones obviously learn from older ones. Unless there's something wrong with their brain. Again, that Unknown Common Ancestor and the difference of dna between chimps or bonobos and humans sure make a biiiigggg difference in thinking and creative abilities.

 

[YoursTrue]

He knew far more about religion than you suggest.

What he said he believed in he called "[Baruch] Spinoza's God", which was and is a naturalistic approach. To both, study of all and subsequent contemplation on what's learned were essential in trying to better understand of God. To them, science is more helpful than religion in this matter, which is an approach a great many of my Swedish relatives take. Needless to say, I also drift in that same direction, but not quite as far as they.

While some claim Einstein was a theist, he just seemed to figure there was something greater than himself out there. I guess. Do you have any more information about his theistic beliefs?

 

[Polymath257]

hmm I don't think that works into the equation we are discussing here. Naturally young ones obviously learn from older ones. Unless there's something wrong with their brain. Again, that Unknown Common Ancestor and the difference of dna between chimps or bonobos and humans sure make a biiiigggg difference in thinking and creative abilities.

I think you have to be careful about that. Chimps are better than humans on a lot of cognitive skills. For example, remembering a sequence of symbols quickly and being able to replay them. Chimps have us beat on that skill.

Creativity is hard to measure in any sense, even with humans.

 

[Polymath257]

I'm not saying it is impossible to 'know' certain things eventually, such as light bending. And this conversation has actually made me more interested in finding out what or how 'light' is produced, if it's emitted from a shining object - if beams of light are particles -- in deference, when I went to school I felt calculus was above me. Although I was a scholarship student, I merely memorized formulas, including those of the atomic type. I didn't understand it, I merely accepted what was taught. (Same with evolution, never questioned it until I was older.) I was into the arts. But now I am interested in light-bending, objects in the way of a beam, and what does light beam consist of, how does it get started. Yup, it sure can be interesting. Everlasting life is certainly in the mind of most humans -- considering most of us want to keep learning. (I doubt chimpanzees have that same re-cognition. )
I still think that there is 'a' supreme Being with intelligence that causes life to exist outside of Himself. Of course, using the male gender to describe God is simply a way that the Bible describes Him. And I accept that, even though I am not a male.
Still happy (most of the time) to be alive, looking forward to the future.

One problem is that light acts like a wave while traveling and like a particle when detected. This is in common with *all* quantum particles, but it is something that is very counter-intuitive at first.

One aspect is that physicists call anything 'light' that is an electromagnetic wave, even if it isn't visible to us humans. So, for example, radio waves are 'light' to a physicist. So are gamma rays, microwave, infrared, ultraviolet and X-rays. ALL are considered to be 'light' because their similarities are greater than their differences. They are all electromagnetic, but have different frequencies and energies.

Light (in this sense) is produced whenever there is a changing electric or magnetic field. This happens at the atomic level all the time. The problem is that to really understand what is going on takes learning quantum mechanics.

You might be interested in the articles I linked to in this thread: Basic Quantum Mechanics

 

[metis]

While some claim Einstein was a theist, he just seemed to figure there was something greater than himself out there. I guess. Do you have any more information about his theistic beliefs?

Because I don't have much time today or tomorrow, let me just link you to this source, and if there's any questions I'll try and deal with them on Monday: Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein - Wikipedia.

 

[Bear Wild]

hmm I don't think that works into the equation we are discussing here. Naturally young ones obviously learn from older ones. Unless there's something wrong with their brain. Again, that Unknown Common Ancestor and the difference of dna between chimps or bonobos and humans sure make a biiiigggg difference in thinking and creative abilities.

The development of language had a profound effect on human social behavior. It allowed for increased complexity is social behaviors, more efficient cultural exchange, and especially with written language humans could build on ideas not possible before. Thus we see the large cultural and tool making complexity difference despite the fact that there is so little difference in actual genetics. We are still related genetically.

 

[YoursTrue]

Because I don't have much time today or tomorrow, let me just link you to this source, and if there's any questions I'll try and deal with them on Monday: Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein - Wikipedia.

I figured Herr Einstein's views on religion (which I don't think he liked much) and a type of God who doesn't much care or is there but not there kind of. I'll bet he would agree with my assessment of his idea.

 

[YoursTrue]

One problem is that light acts like a wave while traveling and like a particle when detected. This is in common with *all* quantum particles, but it is something that is very counter-intuitive at first.

One aspect is that physicists call anything 'light' that is an electromagnetic wave, even if it isn't visible to us humans. So, for example, radio waves are 'light' to a physicist. So are gamma rays, microwave, infrared, ultraviolet and X-rays. ALL are considered to be 'light' because their similarities are greater than their differences. They are all electromagnetic, but have different frequencies and energies.

Light (in this sense) is produced whenever there is a changing electric or magnetic field. This happens at the atomic level all the time. The problem is that to really understand what is going on takes learning quantum mechanics.

You might be interested in the articles I linked to in this thread: Basic Quantum Mechanics

Yes, I was reading something about an embracing idea of thermo something. Well, perhaps I can learn more about it. Right now I have to put groceries away.

 

[YoursTrue]

I think you have to be careful about that. Chimps are better than humans on a lot of cognitive skills. For example, remembering a sequence of symbols quickly and being able to replay them. Chimps have us beat on that skill.

Creativity is hard to measure in any sense, even with humans.

humans can't jump too well from branch to branch, etc. So while animals have different qualities, there is nothing to say they have similar cognitive ability. Superior or not, the thinking is different. I am aware that ants, given their tiny size, for instance, have remarkable power. Elephants, too. Each one made for it's suitability. Let's go back to reading and writing and language. I think you and I have a large difference of understanding.

 

[YoursTrue]

I think you have to be careful about that. Chimps are better than humans on a lot of cognitive skills. For example, remembering a sequence of symbols quickly and being able to replay them. Chimps have us beat on that skill.

Creativity is hard to measure in any sense, even with humans.

it does not mean that humans are a product of evolution or Einstein's variation of God.