chimps are so like us... what does it mean?

[Smidlee]

Apparently, chimps are also capable of metacognition (thinking about their thinking). http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-06/gsu-cmk060815.php

All this shows is man can train an animal by rewarding them with treats.

Using evidence and intelligence is not faith.

And that's not what I wrote.

 

[gluadys]

Hi glaudys,

I honestly can't for the life of me see how the rest of my post agrees with OH. Perhaps you should reread it. If you still think that my post agrees with her, then I'm afraid you'll have to hold my hand and show me how you reason that.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

OK, I will try to hold your hand.

OH said "The laws of nature don't change."

You responded: "The laws of nature tell us that water will not stand as a wall. The natural and everlasting law of water is that it seeks level."

So you agreed that it is a natural and everlasting law that water obeys gravity and seeks its own level. So when we see or hear of water standing as a wall, we know that is not natural. Haven't you agreed then with OH that the laws of nature don't change? We only encounter something different when something beyond them is at work.

Similarly you said: "The laws of nature tell us that there is no way a woman becomes pregnant unless male sperm fertilizes a female egg. You can do it today outside of the uterus, but you still need the basic building blocks of male sperm and female egg to create a viable embryo. We cannot just whip up a human being using iron rods and aluminum foil or dirt and water or any other combination of things. And yet, we have Jesus. An embryo carried to term in the womb of a woman without either."

Does this not agree with both the perspective of OH that the laws of nature do not change and with the Christian perspective that in the conception of Christ, the Holy Spirit acted to produce what nature cannot?

Then as if to confirm all this you added: "God is in the business of working outside of our natural laws of nature."

Why does God work outside the laws of nature when there is something special to be done? Because, as you stated of water, there are natural and everlasting laws that apply to creation which cannot do those special things. So then God acts in a different way to produce what nature cannot.

So how have you disagreed with OH? In fact, have you not agreed that the laws of nature are everlasting and do not change? Is that not why we call those events due directly to God's action outside of natural laws "miracles"? Miracles don't change natural laws because they are independent of natural laws.

 

[Open Heart]

All this shows is man can train an animal by rewarding them with treats.

You cannot train a chimp in metacognition with treats. Are you messing with me?

 

[miamited]

OK, I will try to hold your hand.

OH said "The laws of nature don't change."

You responded: "The laws of nature tell us that water will not stand as a wall. The natural and everlasting law of water is that it seeks level."

So you agreed that it is a natural and everlasting law that water obeys gravity and seeks its own level. So when we see or hear of water standing as a wall, we know that is not natural. Haven't you agreed then with OH that the laws of nature don't change? We only encounter something different when something beyond them is at work.

Similarly you said: "The laws of nature tell us that there is no way a woman becomes pregnant unless male sperm fertilizes a female egg. You can do it today outside of the uterus, but you still need the basic building blocks of male sperm and female egg to create a viable embryo. We cannot just whip up a human being using iron rods and aluminum foil or dirt and water or any other combination of things. And yet, we have Jesus. An embryo carried to term in the womb of a woman without either."

Does this not agree with both the perspective of OH that the laws of nature do not change and with the Christian perspective that in the conception of Christ, the Holy Spirit acted to produce what nature cannot?

Then as if to confirm all this you added: "God is in the business of working outside of our natural laws of nature."

Why does God work outside the laws of nature when there is something special to be done? Because, as you stated of water, there are natural and everlasting laws that apply to creation which cannot do those special things. So then God acts in a different way to produce what nature cannot.

So how have you disagreed with OH? In fact, have you not agreed that the laws of nature are everlasting and do not change? Is that not why we call those events due directly to God's action outside of natural laws "miracles"? Miracles don't change natural laws because they are independent of natural laws.

Hi glaudys.

Well, then by your understanding OH agrees with me. I guess then the question becomes, why she would think that because of the constancy of the natural laws, that then explains evolution.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[gluadys]

Hi glaudys.

Well, then by your understanding OH agrees with me. I guess then the question becomes, why she would think that because of the constancy of the natural laws, that then explains evolution.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

That's easy. Unlike miracles, which are independent of natural laws, evolution works within natural laws. Evolution is an expression of the natural laws by which God normally governs the universe. God made life of such a nature that it would naturally evolve into many different and diverse forms each more or less adaptable to the changing environment of which it is a part. IOW God made creation to be dynamic and creative and made life to be dynamic and creative as well. So it evolves. In this way creation itself is a mirror of its Creator.

 

[miamited]

That's easy. Unlike miracles, which are independent of natural laws, evolution works within natural laws. Evolution is an expression of the natural laws by which God normally governs the universe. God made life of such a nature that it would naturally evolve into many different and diverse forms each more or less adaptable to the changing environment of which it is a part. IOW God made creation to be dynamic and creative and made life to be dynamic and creative as well. So it evolves. In this way creation itself is a mirror of its Creator.

Hi glaudys,

Yes, but my understanding of the Scriptures is that the creative event was a miracle of God. Since I understand the creative event as being a miracle, then God could just as easily have made each creature which then reproduced after its own kind and evolution would have had no part in how the creatures that we see upon the earth today, got to be the animals that we see on the earth today. I also believe that this is exactly why Paul warns us to not be swayed by arguments that are based on the natural properties of things.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Open Heart]

Yes, but my understanding of the Scriptures is that the creative event was a miracle of God.

The creative event was a process. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Here God forms the basic laws of the universe that will remain constant. Then, God formed man from the dust of the earth. Here there are many many steps from the dust to what we are today; God uses evolution as his modus operandi to create life, and it remains a constant process to this day.

 

[gluadys]

Hi glaudys,

Yes, but my understanding of the Scriptures is that the creative event was a miracle of God. Since I understand the creative event as being a miracle, then God could just as easily have made each creature which then reproduced after its own kind and evolution would have had no part in how the creatures that we see upon the earth today, got to be the animals that we see on the earth today. I also believe that this is exactly why Paul warns us to not be swayed by arguments that are based on the natural properties of things.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Scripture is not really cognizant of natural law. It seldom makes any distinction between God using natural laws to do things and God working independently of natural law. In either case it is God's work and that is what seems to be important to the biblical authors. They stand as much in awe of God's natural works as of his supernatural works. An attitude well worth imitating IMO.

 

[Mattao]

How close to us do chimps have to be before we acknowledge that they are our cousins?

Presently, the state of New York is wrestling with the question of whether chimpanzees should legally be considered persons, with the right of habeus corpus. What do you think?

Consider that chimps murder, rape, go to war... They even spontaneously began making spears. They have a theory of mind. They can act in compassion. In some ways, such as visual memory, they are superior to us. The latest news is that they prefer cooked food and will delay gratification in order to cook it. I could go on and on with their cognitive skills... You get the point.

Where is the line for you?

I seen a documentary about the worlds smartest orangutang. Back in the 70's when it was born some lady spent the first 10 years of it's life treating it like a human and teaching it American sign language.
It grew to understand the value of currency and the reward of a hard days work.
It's trainers would take it to fast food places like dairy queen and burger joints and with the money it earned around the campus it was being trained on it bought cheese burgers and icecream.
When the staff began to become to broke to pay it, they swapped out washers for money.
From birth it went on to be treated as a human being and was testing at age appropriate material.
It was and is to this day, the only orangutang that can use sign language and use it really well.

Then one day after 11 years had gone by some girl had met up with it in a hallway of the campus he lived on, and claimed that the orangutang assaulted her.
So the school decided to send it back to where it came from and stop all research.
He spent 10 years in a 5x5 cell until his former trainer found a zoo he could go to.
They asked him at the zoo what he thought of the other orangutangs and he asked them, "You mean those ugly orange dogs?"
There were hammocks in the orangutang area and for some unknown reason the hammocks kept falling apart. They discovered what was happening when the orangutang from the school, offered them washers for a cheese burger.

The zoo stopped the orangutangs former trainer special access from seeing him and denied him any human food like icecream or cheese burgers and when his former trainer buys a ticket to the zoo to go see him as a patron, he secretly begs her for cheese burgers and icecream.
Not only that, but he continually asks to go home.

It is totally not this orangutangs fault that he wants to feel the freedom of buying an icream cone or a cheese burger or having the pride that comes from earning your own money.

The sad reality is, that he is being kept from doing these things because evolutionist believe that it is the utmost importance that he get back to his roots so he can feel the most natural.
Which is very obviously never going to happen. He's always going to want a cheeseburger over a leafy stick.

I believe, that there are all kinds of animals like this orangutang that can understand way more then we ever thought possible.
But I also believe that natural selection hasnt proven that a species will evolve outside of itself and at the end of the day animals are just animals.
We should take good care of them and be good caretakers, like the bible says. But we should also do with them as we wish, because its what God told us to do and to offer them their own rights as sentient beings, would be wrong.
They wouldnt understand a thing unless we spent a life time showing them.

 

[Mattao]

The creative event was a process. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Here God forms the basic laws of the universe that will remain constant. Then, God formed man from the dust of the earth. Here there are many many steps from the dust to what we are today; God uses evolution as his modus operandi to create life, and it remains a constant process to this day.

Actually, that's inserting a lot of some other kind of understanding into scripture.
The kind of understanding that doesnt see how God could possibly do it any other way so it's making blanket accusations for it's own benefit.
Which is total B.S.
God told us very clearly how he did things and he also told us to have faith in what he said. The assumption that a person needs to know how God did things or that a person even can know how God did things is wrong. It's where faith steps in and a person supplies the mustard seed. Anyone inserting their own understanding into scripture, clearly lacks a mustard seed. Otherwise they wouldn't be shoving their foot in their mouth when they talk about creation.

God said a lot of things that make understanding that clear. For example, he said he is not of the natural and that he is invisible. I can give you scientific evidence toward the great flood, which I think is awesome, but I have absolutely no evidence toward creation and I also think that's awesome and I really dont need any until God decides to give me some.
That's how God works.
You wait on him to enlighten you because his timing is perfect. You dont insert your own version of events into the bible because the current version doesn't suite you.

 

[Smidlee]

I seen a documentary about the worlds smartest orangutang. Back in the 70's when it was born some lady spent the first 10 years of it's life treating it like a human and teaching it American sign language.
It grew to understand the value of currency and the reward of a hard days work.
It's trainers would take it to fast food places like dairy queen and burger joints and with the money it earned around the campus it was being trained on it bought cheese burgers and icecream.
When the staff began to become to broke to pay it, they swapped out washers for money.
From birth it went on to be treated as a human being and was testing at age appropriate material.
It was and is to this day, the only orangutang that can use sign language and use it really well.

Then one day after 11 years had gone by some girl had met up with it in a hallway of the campus he lived on, and claimed that the orangutang assaulted her.
So the school decided to send it back to where it came from and stop all research.
He spent 10 years in a 5x5 cell until his former trainer found a zoo he could go to.
They asked him at the zoo what he thought of the other orangutangs and he asked them, "You mean those ugly orange dogs?"
There were hammocks in the orangutang area and for some unknown reason the hammocks kept falling apart. They discovered what was happening when the orangutang from the school, offered them washers for a cheese burger.

We have to be careful in assuming too much about an animals intelligence when we train them. It seems obvious that the orangutang didn't really understand the "value of currency" after all which is why it kept taking washers from the hammocks. All it knew was for some reason it got tasty food for washers. Someone trained their dog before to say "I love you" and of course the dog was rewarded with a treat.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150526140601.htm

Dedre Gentner, a co-author of the study and professor of psychology at Weinberg, said, "The infants in our study were able to form an abstract same or different relation after seeing only 6-9 examples. It appears that relational learning is something that humans, even very young humans, are much better at than other primates."

For example, she noted that in a recent study using baboons, those animals that succeeded in matching same and different relations required over 15,000 trials.

Over 15,000 trials? So if you spend a lot of time and effort we can make an animal to appear smarter than they really are.

 

[Open Heart]

Not only that, but he continually asks to go home.

It is unconscionable what was done to that orangutan.

 

[Open Heart]

Over 15,000 trials? So if you spend a lot of time and effort we can make an animal to appear smarter than they really are.

There really are some things at which animals are smarter at than us. It just takes us a lot more trials to admit it.

 

[Mattao]

We have to be careful in assuming too much about an animals intelligence when we train them. It seems obvious that the orangutang didn't really understand the "value of currency" after all which is why it kept taking washers from the hammocks. All it knew was for some reason it got tasty food for washers. Someone trained their dog before to say "I love you" and of course the dog was rewarded with a treat.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150526140601.htm

Over 15,000 trials? So if you spend a lot of time and effort we can make an animal to appear smarter than they really are.

O.K. I apologize for having to modify this, I had a eureka moment while typing this post and I would like to share it with my fellow creationist.

How smart animals are has no bearing on where they fit in the tree of life and their purpose for fitting in any particular branch of the tree of life is the reason evolution couldn't work.

Whether it be, instinct and something like how its mother smells that makes it bond to its mother or being taught and learning the necessary skills to survive and the process of understanding a skill is what binds a thing to it's mother.
It's whatever means any particular species goes through to recognize as self. To understand who they are is a bonding experience that takes place between them and whatever is teaching them how to survive in the world.
Understanding who they are, its the thing that keeps them in that particular branch of the tree of life.

You take an orangutang out of its environment and teach it that its human and show it how to paint art, or spend money, or build a house, its not going to be able to pass that information along to other orangutangs because it doesn't think its an orangutang any longer and will treat other orangutangs as if they're outside of its species.
Thats what separates us from them. We have the ability to understand we're human no matter what and animals will instill their understanding of self on whatever is instinctive to it.
It's why they dont remember long enough to evolve, because if they believe they're something other than what God intended them to be they're not going to associate with their own species, they're going to associate with whatever taught them to survive and the knowledge will be lost with the individual because it no longer associated with its own species.

It's why natural selection has not been proven and never will.

Thanks.

 

[Smidlee]

There really are some things at which animals are smarter at than us. It just takes us a lot more trials to admit it.

Or God "wired" animals different. For example a bird knows how much energy it needs to make a long trip from Alaska to Hawaii without doing the complex math, understand everything about flight and saving energy by flying in the V formation. Man brain is wired to look up into the heavens and know there is life up there. Even unbelievers waste time and resources trying to find life in the heavens. Man tries to see purpose and meaning behind everything.

 

[Open Heart]

Or God "wired" animals different. For example a bird knows how much energy it needs to make a long trip from Alaska to Hawaii without doing the complex math, understand everything about flight and saving energy by flying in the V formation. Man brain is wired to look up into the heavens and know there is life up there. Even unbelievers waste time and resources trying to find life in the heavens. Man tries to see purpose and meaning behind everything.

Every species is wired differently than every other, and yet we have some things in common.

 

[gluadys]

There really are some things at which animals are smarter at than us. It just takes us a lot more trials to admit it.

True. Have you ever read "Apes,, Language and the Human Mind" by Sue Savage-Rumbaugh, et al? The scientists working with the bonobos were soon enough convinced they were communicating intelligently with their human keepers as well as each other, to the point where they must have a "theory of mind" i.e. an awareness that others also have minds similar to their own.

But they had to spend many more months and run many more tests before they could convince scientists who were not working directly with the bonobos.

In her introduction she describes the eerily near-human quality of the bonobos:

At times as I watch them, I seem to be staring into my own distant past and seeing in front of me "quasi persons" not people, but "near people" . The feeling is as though, in an eerie and inexplicable way, I am watching a species that is not the same as me, yet is connected to me--is part of me. Even after many years of watching and studying bonobos, I still cannot help but sense that I am in the presence of the emergence of the human mind, the dawn of our peculiarly human perspective and feeling.
. . . Their sharing of emotional perspective is of a peculiarly human sort, and I relate to it and am bound into their feelings in a natural human manner, without effort. A human does not need to read a catalogue of bonobo facial expressions or vocalizations to understand the bonobo. When I observe a bonobo, it is as though I am standing at the precipice of the human soul, peering deep into some distant part of myself." ​

 

[Open Heart]

they were communicating intelligently with their human keepers as well as each other, to the point where they must have a "theory of mind"

YES! Amazing, isn't it?