- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,118
- 1,649
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
it's more reliable than 2nd hand hearsay speculation, which is the most you have on the matter
Upvote
0
Human & Ape Inquiry
- Thread starter inquiring mind
- Start date
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Generally, from the Bible, then comparing with the overall concept of macroevolution and real-time observation, and applying common sense.
Yes, I know.
Upvote
0
pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,372
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
Physically animals may not be able to speak language in the exact same way we do. However, they have methods of communication that can be considered forms of language and are clearly born with that ability.
On top of that, we have taught forms of language to other primates and they've demonstrated the ability to communicate ideas and emotions, and even teach other primates. Just read up on cases like of primates being taught language like Washoe, Koko, Kanzi, etc:
Washoe (chimpanzee) - Wikipedia
Koko (gorilla) - Wikipedia
Kanzi - Wikipedia
I don't know how anyone could look at these cases and come away claiming it's impossible for animals to learn language. They clearly have the cognitive capabilities for it.
Upvote
0
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
I have said animals are smart, some very smart, but you can’t compare ‘see and do’ games among a few elite apes and chimpanzees to human intellect across-the-board. I can’t say much about learning another language, heck, I can’t do it myself. But, to say the ability is there, or will intellectually evolve, for them to become an iphone-carrying, plane-flying, calculus-using equal to man is bit ‘planet of the ape-ish’ to me.
Upvote
0
pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,372
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
Did you even read the links I provided? These aren't "see and do games" (whatever that is supposed to mean). These are examples of primates learning communication and being able to convey ideas and emotions via the same.
Read the links.
Your incredulity is noted.
In my experience, any time I've looked for something that makes humans specifically unique, I find that invariably there is some example in the animal kingdom that dissuaded me of that motion. Sure, animals may not be inventing iPhones (yet), but there is certainly nothing to suggest that in the absence of humans that some other animal species could eventually evolve similar capabilities.
Upvote
0
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, I have read about these accounts before. As I said, some animals have shown extraordinary intelligence... I’m not denying it. Look, science is a wonderful thing, a gift from God whereby we can contemplate things for the betterment of mankind, and all creatures. Evolution within the constructs of our Kinds is evident, but there is no definitive evidence of the idea of macroevolution, physically and/or intellectually, beyond non-believer’s misinterpretation of clues that fuel speculation and belief in false things, and I believe false ideas as well (Romans 1:19-23). They exchange God’s truth (Genesis 1:26-28) for their perceived earthly wisdom. I have a dog that I love very much, and I know he loves me. He is right up there as a family member. But, he knows he’s a dog, like I know I’m a man. I’m not better than him; we’re just God’s different creatures, and that’s the way it is.
Upvote
0
pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,372
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
Like I said, your incredulity is noted.
Evolution including "macroevolution" is quite well supported (and even an applied science) regardless of your personal opinion on the matter.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
46AND2
Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
- Sep 5, 2012
- 5,807
- 2,210
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Did you not finish reading my post? I literally explained in the next sentence why I gave that example.
How can you possibly know how something "otherwise would have" happened?
Upvote
0
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
I said it was supported at the micro level, and even at the macro level (although not definitively there). As an applied science, I agree a lot can be learned about man’s condition, and that certain assumptions may prove correct, but many of the macro level conjectures are just too far of a leap, and appear to be contrary to God’s word, and likewise, that’s if my interpretation is correct.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, I think you’re probably right in most cases... I’m not so hardheaded as to argue that point. But, from one who tries to look at it, somewhat objectively anyway (don’t laugh, I do a lot of research during these discussions), I’ll say that if my interpretation is wrong, then I’m wrong... but, that doesn’t automatically mean your interpretation is right. And, God’s word is truth, however it goes.
Upvote
0
It may surprise you to learn that real forensics teams never actually travel into the past to obtain their evidence; they infer and deduce what happened in the past from evidence available in the present
Unconfirmed witness testimony is now generally acknowledged to be the least reliable form of evidence, not least because it so often turns out to be unreliable, and because we have far more knowledge and understanding of the reasons behind this unreliability than we had only a few tens of years ago.
As for claims about the world in general, we have tried and tested means for assessing and evaluating such claims - the tools and techniques of science.
Upvote
0
That's a considerable understatement; there is some expert debate over whether the ToE or quantum mechanics is the best supported scientific theory we have.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Dec 31, 2016
- 7,222
- 3,311
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Sort of like the debate experts had concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, I suppose.
Upvote
0
Structurally and functionally, all mammals have the same kind of brain (this is arguably true of all vertebrate brains) - some are larger than others and all are specialised in various ways, but the same basic structures with the same basic functions are identifiable in all.
Human brains are specialised for cognitive flexibility and abstraction. The results of their synergy have been spectacular, via language and culture, but the differences between our brains and those of other primates are not really differences in kind, but differences in the size and organization of specific features. However, although most human cognitive capacities can be seen in a recognisable form in other animals, there are huge differences in the coordination, flexibility, and limitations of these capacities between humans and other animals.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
