Do we humans disprove evolution?

[Pulchra]

i think humans disprove evolution, think about it, its the only species that cant live in nature and with higher intelligence they dont seem to behave normally being kind and stuff, so why did evolution make them smarter but not kinder?

 

[Paulos23]

We can live in nature, and some people get the skills to do so. It will not be at the level of health most enjoy today, but it is possible.

And we do live in nature, we just shape nature far more than any other animal. Even though a number of them do change their environment. Beavers and most ant colonies are the ones that come to mind. I am sure there are others.

We may be the one animal that changed the environment the most on this planet since the great oxygen poisoning, but it doesn't get us out of evolutionary forces.

 

[public hermit]

Humans are just like the rest of nature, red in tooth and claw. Give two friendly dogs one piece of meat and they act just as we do over politics. Perhaps if we were, in fact, smarter we would be kinder. But alas, animals! The whole lot!

 

[klutedavid]

i think humans disprove evolution, think about it, its the only species that cant live in nature and with higher intelligence they dont seem to behave normally being kind and stuff, so why did evolution make them smarter but not kinder?

I can't say whether we are a special creation within evolution, or whether we are a special creation outside of evolution. We have been created by Jesus and how He did that is anyone's guess.

We are not driven by instinct like every other species. We constantly choose and think about every action we take, every day.

What really amazes me, is how long a human infant takes to develop to an age. Where the child is old enough to take care of itself. In the wild it is days, a week, even a month or two. Not so with a human infant, we are talking about say ten or more years. That is an extreme amount of time for a mother to care for her young.

 

[SelfSim]

..think about it, its the only species that cant live in nature ...

Any distinction between nature and humans, is an artificial one.

 

[Aussie Pete]

i think humans disprove evolution, think about it, its the only species that cant live in nature and with higher intelligence they dont seem to behave normally being kind and stuff, so why did evolution make them smarter but not kinder?

Humans are so different from any other creature that the idea we evolved is laughable. We are created in the image of God, even though that image has been distorted by sin.

 

[Occams Barber]

What really amazes me, is how long a human infant takes to develop to an age. Where the child is old enough to take care of itself. In the wild it is days, a week, even a month or two. Not so with a human infant, we are talking about say ten or more years. That is an extreme amount of time for a mother to care for her young.

Humans aren't particularly unusual. Many animals have an extended period of parental support. This is particularly true if you consider time spent as a supported infant as a proportion of total lifespan. Some animals stay with their relatives for their entire life.

Read this for more background:
Failure to Launch: These Animals Stay With Mom For Years (nationalgeographic.com)

It even has a name - Altriciality - Wikipedia

OB

 

[Tropical Wilds]

i think humans disprove evolution, think about it, its the only species that cant live in nature and with higher intelligence they dont seem to behave normally being kind and stuff, so why did evolution make them smarter but not kinder?

Because kindness is an subjective social construct and intelligence is an objective analysis of measurable data and learned experiences...?

 

[keith99]

Humans are so different from any other creature that the idea we evolved is laughable. We are created in the image of God, even though that image has been distorted by sin.

Pride is a sin. And humans evolving is as reasonable or laughable as the eye evolving.

 

[Occams Barber]

Humans are so different from any other creature that the idea we evolved is laughable.

You could say the same thing about any animal, e.g.;

Rhinoceros' are so different from any other creature that the idea they evolved is laughable.

OB

 

[Aussie Pete]

You could say the same thing about any animal, e.g.;

Rhinoceros' are so different from any other creature that the idea they evolved is laughable.

OB

The differences between animal species are basically physical. Humans are superficially similar in that they are flesh and blood. What makes man different is the spiritual dimension. Man has a conscience. There is no way that could just evolve. Man is God conscious. Evolution cannot explain that. Man is creative in ways that no animal is. That is an aspect of God's image. It's not something that just evolves.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

We are not driven by instinct like every other species. We constantly choose and think about every action we take, every day.

Humans aren’t any less driven by instinct than other animals, and humans aren’t more driven by conscious thought and choices than other animals.

What really amazes me, is how long a human infant takes to develop to an age. Where the child is old enough to take care of itself. In the wild it is days, a week, even a month or two. Not so with a human infant, we are talking about say ten or more years. That is an extreme amount of time for a mother to care for her young.

Again, depends on the animal.

Opossums are ready to be on their own at about 4 months old. However, their life span is about a year... So they actually stay with their mother as long (and longer) than the average child. Dolphins stay with their mothers for 3-5 years of their 15 year average lifespan, so they stay as long and longer than humans too.

Some animals boot them before they’re born, others fold their kids into herd/flock/pod family units for the whole of their lives. It all depends, just like it does for humans. A the answer to how long a child stays with their parent changes based off of heritage, locations, situations, and other factors. An American child, a child in a war-torn Provence, and a child in a remote closed-dynamic tribe will stay with their children all different times. Some people have their kids out and married by 13 or 14, others stay to care for their parents with the expectation their kids stay to care for them when they get old.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Pride is a sin. And humans evolving is as reasonable or laughable as the eye evolving.

On the first count, I agree. And how the eye could evolve is something only blind devotion to evolution could find reasonable. As I said to OB,

The differences between animal species are basically physical. Humans are superficially similar in that they are flesh and blood. What makes man different is the spiritual dimension. Man has a conscience. There is no way that could just evolve. Man is God conscious. Evolution cannot explain that. Man is creative in ways that no animal is. That is an aspect of God's image. It's not something that just evolves.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Humans aren’t any less driven by instinct than other animals, and humans aren’t more driven by conscious thought and choices than other animals.



Again, depends on the animal.

Opossums are ready to be on their own at about 4 months old. However, their life span is about a year... So they actually stay with their mother as long (and longer) than the average child. Dolphins stay with their mothers for 3-5 years of their 15 year average lifespan, so they stay as long and longer than humans too.

Some animals boot them before they’re born, others fold their kids into herd/flock/pod family units for the whole of their lives. It all depends, just like it does for humans. A the answer to how long a child stays with their parent changes based off of heritage, locations, situations, and other factors. An American child, a child in a war-torn Provence, and a child in a remote closed-dynamic tribe will stay with their children all different times. Some people have their kids out and married by 13 or 14, others stay to care for their parents with the expectation their kids stay to care for them when they get old.

The difference is that humans have a conscience. They are driven solely by instinct. There is a spiritual dimension to man that animals do not have. It is possible for people to destroy their conscience by constantly going against it. Apart from those people, most have a good sense of right and wrong. No one takes a lion to court for eating an impala. A poacher is a different story.

 

[Occams Barber]

The differences between animal species are basically physical. Humans are superficially similar in that they are flesh and blood. What makes man different is the spiritual dimension. Man has a conscience. There is no way that could just evolve. Man is God conscious. Evolution cannot explain that. Man is creative in ways that no animal is. That is an aspect of God's image. It's not something that just evolves.

Conscience could evolve naturally through group behaviour. Group behaviour is a major evolutionary tool employed by many animals. Conscience could also be a learned behaviour. I don't find conscience any more inexplicable than learning to keep your hand out of the fire. I suspect it's a combination of instinct and learning.

The jury is still out on whether animals have something we could reasonably define as conscience. There's a similar problem with human babies.

5 Animals With a Moral Compass | Animal Emotions | Live Science
Do Animas Know Right From Wrong? | Live Science
OB

 

[SelfSim]

The difference is that humans have a conscience. They are driven solely by instinct. There is a spiritual dimension to man that animals do not have.

You think all humans are driven solely by their beliefs, then?
(Therefore, non-belief distinguishes a non-human then?)

 

[Tropical Wilds]

The difference is that humans have a conscience. They are driven solely by instinct. There is a spiritual dimension to man that animals do not have. It is possible for people to destroy their conscience by constantly going against it. Apart from those people, most have a good sense of right and wrong. No one takes a lion to court for eating an impala. A poacher is a different story.

Funny you mention lions... Lions do have an inner hierarchy where they punish and reward. Lionesses who are poor hunters are given less preferential treatment in terms of where they sleep, how they access water, and even if they are chosen for mating. Male lions have been turned on and killed by their own pride for killing other lions in defiance of their pride social structure. There is a fascinating case of a major seasonal water source that was used by all, prey and predator. Scientists can’t understand why they co-exist while there, but they do. One day a lion attacked an elephant, not only did the elephants attack the lion, but the other lions of the same pride attacked and killed the offending animal.

Animals in nature and domestication have been proven to mourn, celebrate, or mark occasions of importance. Elephants hold “funerals” for their dead and have been known to routinely add hundreds of miles to a migratory journey in order to return to the death site of a family member. Crows present each other with gifts. Monkeys can identify problems and use tools to solve them. Birds will intentionally allow themselves to die after the loss of a mate.

Just because you can’t communicate with them about what they do and why they do it doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening. Here’s guessing if we were to ask your cat if you had a higher power based religious construct you believe in, it would say “nope.” That doesn’t mean you don’t, it just means you and your cat will probably not engage in a discussion on theology.

 

[klutedavid]

Humans aren't particularly unusual. Many animals have an extended period of parental support. This is particularly true if you consider time spent as a supported infant as a proportion of total lifespan. Some animals stay with their relatives for their entire life.

Read this for more background:
Failure to Launch: These Animals Stay With Mom For Years (nationalgeographic.com)

It even has a name - Altriciality - Wikipedia

OB

I understand what you are saying. The human infant is vulnerable to predators for up to a decade. How many other species have offspring that are so vulnerable, and for so long. Human infants don't have speed, claws, teeth, or camouflage. They can't climb or swim.

A human infant has to be carried by hand for an extended period of time. A human infant can't hear approaching predators or even smell any predators. We don't have fur so we cannot endure cold climates. We need to live in villages with walls, if we want to survive.

 

[klutedavid]

You think all humans are driven solely by their beliefs, then?
(Therefore, non-belief distinguishes a non-human then?)

I think that is the case. Humans are driven by their passions and desires. You will find yourself doing exactly what you believe you should be doing.

 

[klutedavid]

Humans aren’t any less driven by instinct than other animals, and humans aren’t more driven by conscious thought and choices than other animals.

I would disagree.

Opossums are ready to be on their own at about 4 months old. However, their life span is about a year... So they actually stay with their mother as long (and longer) than the average child. Dolphins stay with their mothers for 3-5 years of their 15 year average lifespan, so they stay as long and longer than humans too.

We are talking about infants wandering the open savannah for a decade.

Do possums forage at night? Possums are tree dwelling not open savannah species?

I think you missed the point.

Human children are vulnerable for far too long and the mothers are also defenseless.