Re: Humans Are Apes who Believe in Gravity and Common Ancestry

On Apr 12, 6:37 pm, "Just Lurking" <justlurki...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 12, 8:05 pm, geop...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 13, 12:06 am, "Just Lurking" <justlurki...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Humans are apes" was the blunt response to a creationist who said
that apes could not have "morphed' into humans. If this statement is
true then, "apes are humans" should also be true.

You may be astonished to know that 'A is B' does not imply 'B is A'.
For example, all taxicabs are cars, but not all cars are taxicabs.

The common way of putting it is this:

Humans are lifeforms.
Humans are vertebrates.
Humans are mammals.
Humans are apes.

Some disagree with the last one because they have more faith in a book
than in their God's creation.

If Apes are human, then it follows that some humans are apes. Not all
humans are apes, only some of them. Of course we already knew that.

Set contains subset. All members of subset are members of set. Not
all members of set are members of subset.

Cats are a subset of mammals. All members of cats are members of
mammals. Not all members of mammals are members of cats.

Hawks are a subset of birds. All members of hawks are members of
birds. Not all members of birds are members of hawks.

Humans are a subset of apes. All members of humans are members of
apes. Not all members of apes are members of humans.

Do you see how it works?


[snip arguments based on this flawed premise]

The point is that apes have many human features, yet we lock them in
cages like human criminals and do medical experiments on them. Spain
apparently believes that apes are to be given rights of humans.

Which has nothing to do with set-subset.

In contrast to the primates, cetaceans are particularly far-removed
from humans in evolutionary time. Therefore, cognitive abilities
generally cannot be claimed to derive from a common ancestor

I can't see how this follows from the premise. Who says cognitive
abilities evolved in only the primate lineage? It's a pretty handy
thing to have.

Some people have an anthropomorphic viewpoint on intelligence. The
cetacean intelligence refutes the assertion that only the primate
lineage produces intelligence.

Nobody claimed that only the primate line produces intelligence. You
claimed that others claim it so you could refute it. That is a
fallacy called "straw man".

"You say the sky is red. It's obviously blue. Therefore you are
wrong."
"But I never claimed the sky is red."
"I just proved you wrong."

, whereas

such claims are sometimes made by researchers studying primate
cognition.

I highly doubt that. It would be stupid, since lots of animals are
known to have cognitive abilities.

If you had read the part you snipped you would understand that only
cetaceans and primates have self awareness, a feature shared by
humans..

And elephants.

The Big Bang theory does not support common ancestry.

Sure it does. The common ancestor was the singularity.

A common ancestor is a living thing. The singularity was not a living
thing. Therefore it is not the common ancestor.

A = B.
C != B.
A != C

What is objectionable is to declare that the miraculous event we call
life is the result of randomness, leaving out any mention of a
possible creator or supreme being.
Science is not required to add to every theory 'oh, but God may have
done it, also'.

Doesn't prohibit it either.

But why add it?

Science is an attempt to describe the universe. The theory of
evolution describes life on this planet very well.

Very well for some people. Not very well for others.

It describes it very accurately, it objectively describes it very
well, whether people subjectively think it does so or not.

Does it bother you that we explain thunderstorms in terms of electric
charge, rather than god? Does it bother you that earthquakes are
explained by the movements of the Earth's plates, rather than by earth
elementals?

Doesn't bother me, Why?

Because those faith based propositions are just as logical as the
faith based proposition you propose for evolution.

If not, then why does it bother you that evolution is
explained by natural selection?

Sorry to disappoint you, but evolution is NOT explained by natural
selection. Otherwise, we wouldn't have the Directed Evolution people,
Natures Destiny by Denton

http://home.wxs.nl/~gkorthof/kortho29.htm

The anthropic principle is an inversion of cause and effect. If I
drop my coffee cup, it will fall to the floor and break. You and the
author you reference say that I dropped it because it fell to the
floor and broke, but I will say it fell to the floor and broke because
I dropped it. Alternatively, I would say the cup broke because the
floor is hard, while he would say the floor is hard because the cup
broke.

By making this declaration of
randomness, a replacement belief system is created which encroaches on
Judeo-Christian monotheism.

A number of your colleagues have asked Ray why he doesn't "believe" in
various things, such as common descent etc.

I suggest this practice of requiring various beliefs from Ray or
anyone else to be discarded.

It's not that the beliefs are required, but that the beliefs are
inquired. He obviously believes something, but trying to dialogue
with him is like discussing philosophy with a howler monkey - it
thinks it's won if it screams and throws poo.

Science is not a religion.

It becomes religion when you ask Ray why he does not "believe" in
common descent, gravity or anything else. When you require a belief,
then it is no longer science. It becomes religion.

Ray is entirely faith based. People who don't throw poo on usenet
tend to be more accepting of evidence.

Agreed. Teach both sides. Teach science in science class, and religion
in religion class.

Why not teach them both in the same class? 30 min for one, 30 min for
the other with a spitball break in between. No downside here. Call
the class "how science and religion views the universe " I wouldnt
tell Judge Jones about it though.

To thoroughly teach creationism takes less than one minute. Stand in
front of the class and say 'god did it'. It's not scientific and
therefore doesn't belong in the science class.

To thoroughly teach evolution, something you never were the recipient
of, takes many hours. There is a great deal to the theory.

But this is not what fundies want. They want religion taught in /
science/ class. Why may that be? If I were cynical, I may suggest that
this is to take time away from scientific theories that clash with
what they want children to believe. But unfortunately, we're the good
guys, so we're not allowed to make the kind of foaming accusations
that fundies make against us. :(-

http://www.stickergiant.com/page/sg/PROD/funinsa/dcb606

Does this mean you have no intent to answer?

Jason Harvestdancer

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: In the News: Expelled Exposes Plight of Darwin Doubters
    ... justification for excluding us from the "monkey" clade? ... As humans are apes, how can an ape turn into a human? ... portion of our common ancestor with any other species has turned into us ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: In the News: Expelled Exposes Plight of Darwin Doubters
    ... justification for excluding us from the "monkey" clade? ... As humans are apes, how can an ape turn into a human? ... portion of our common ancestor with any other species has turned into us ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: In the News: Expelled Exposes Plight of Darwin Doubters
    ... If we are monkeys, ... We are apes, so we can't turn into apes. ... portion of our common ancestor with any other species has turned into us ... human relatives evolved into humans. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: We are apes.
    ... "apes morphed into men." ... fallacy (though not for the reason most creationists would suppose). ... The reason it is a fallacy is that humans are, and always have been, ... Western Gorilla, Gorilla gorilla ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Humans, Apes & tic-tac-toe
    ... If you mean "non human ape", please indicate which species. ... Humans often play games against each other, ... similarities in behavior and intelligence with other apes. ... chimps have shown some ability to do that. ...
    (talk.origins)