Question for evolutionists

[jamie4418]

Deleted.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Okay. Simple question for evolutionists. What do you folks believe makes a species more evolved?

In terms of evolution, it's all about survival in a particular niche. So to determine if something was "more evolved", you'd have to look at it in that context.

As I mentioned earlier, there are organisms adapted to survive around hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean. We can't do that. So it terms of that particular niche, those other organisms are "more evolved".

OTOH, we've managed to evolve into quite a number of niches across the planet. So you could argue that compared to other species with less ability to dominate those niches, we are "more evolved" in that regard.

You can also look at things like specific types of lifeforms and longevity of survival. Ants, for example, have been around for about 100 million years. Humans have been around for around 100 thousand years. So ants clearly have a headstart when it comes to being able to survive. Will humans be here in a 100 million years? Who knows?

And finally, in terms of contemporary survival, you can argue that we're all equally evolved, because we're all contemporarily adapted to survive on the planet. Obviously, this isn't static, since things are changing and species continually go exinct.

 

[jamie4418]

Deleted.

 

[jamie4418]

In terms of evolution, it's all about survival in a particular niche. So to determine if something was "more evolved", you'd have to look at it in that context.

As I mentioned earlier, there are organisms adapted to survive around hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean. We can't do that. So it terms of that particular niche, those other organisms are "more evolved".

OTOH, we've managed to evolve into quite a number of niches across the planet. So you could argue that compared to other species with less ability to dominate those niches, we are "more evolved" in that regard.

You can also look at things like specific types of lifeforms and longevity of survival. Ants, for example, have been around for about 100 million years. Humans have been around for around 100 thousand years. So ants clearly have a headstart when it comes to being able to survive. Will humans be here in a 100 million years? Who knows?

And finally, in terms of contemporary survival, you can argue that we're all equally evolved, because we're all contemporarily adapted to survive on the planet. Obviously, this isn't static, since things are changing and species continually go exinct.

Thank you for your answer. So you don't believe that humans dominate all species on the earth? Right?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Thank you for your answer. So you don't believe that humans dominate all species on the earth? Right?

Clearly we don't.

 

[jamie4418]

Deleted.

 

[dawiyd]

Hi Dawiyd. Do you believe we humans are, or aren't the most evolved?

Most evolved for what?

 

[jamie4418]

So, Pete. Man's ability to create a gazillion nuclear bombs, weapons, hunting tools, ability to put animals in zoos, show that we do NOT dominate other species on the earth?

 

[dawiyd]

-

 

[Pete Harcoff]

So, Pete. Man's ability to create a gazillion nuclear bombs, weapons, hunting tools, ability to put animals in zoos, show that we do NOT dominate other species on the earth?

No. It might mean that we have a survival edge over certain species in certain contexts. But again, you can't over-generalize here. It all comes back to context.

Again, we can't cure the common cold. Therefore do viruses (virii?) dominate over humans?

 

[jamie4418]

Clearly we don't.

Most evolved for what?

-

I'm talking about animals here - cows, elephants, apes.

AIDS is clearly not an animal.

 

[jamie4418]

No. It might mean that we have a survival edge over certain species in certain contexts. But again, you can't over-generalize here. It all comes back to context.

Again, we can't cure the common cold. Therefore do virsuses dominate over humans?

Like I said to Dawiyd. I'm talking about animals here. Not viruses. Humans most definitely dominate viruses.

 

[dawiyd]

I'm talking about animals here - cows, elephants, apes.

AIDS is clearly not an animal.

You said dominate species, HIV is a species now show me how we dominate it.

 

[jamie4418]

You said dominate species, HIV is a species now show me how we dominate it.

I'm definitely not saying we dominate AIDS. I'm talking about animals here - cows, pigs, elephants, apes, etc.

I'm saying we humans dominate all animals on the earth.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Like I said to Dawiyd. I'm talking about animals here. Not viruses.

Um, earlier you said this: "But do you believe humans totally dominate all life forms and species?"

Humans most definitely dominate viruses.

How do you figure? If you contracted HIV, would you be able to dominate it?

 

[jamie4418]

Like I said before. Doesn't the fact that we could put countless animals in zoos show that we dominate animals?

 

[jamie4418]

Guys. I will most definitely concede man does not dominate AIDS. I'm talking animals here.

http://www.answers.com/animal&r=67

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Like I said before. Doesn't the fact that we could put countless animals in zoos show that we dominate animals?

Sure, we can dominate them at putting animals in zoos. OTOH, the animals that live around hydrothermal vents clearly dominate us when it comes to living around hydrothermal vents.

What is your point?

 

[dawiyd]

I'm definitely not saying we dominate AIDS. I'm talking about animals here - cows, pigs, elephants, apes, etc.

I'm saying we humans dominate all animals on the earth.

You said and I specifically quote http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=30272419&postcount=54

Hey Dawiyd. What I mean is that we humans dominate all species on the earth. Can any evolutionist refute that?

So not only are you contradicting yourself, you are making claims you cannot substantiate.

Now again since HIV is a species, please show me how we dominate HIV, if you can't I seriously suggest that you subtract your comment.

 

[jamie4418]

Deleted.