Evolving apes.

I see an animal, after god created man he breathed life into him and HE BECAME A LIVING SOUL, I accept that as true not the nonsense that we arose from lower order apes and hominids

I see. So you accept the writings of a primitive and savage people written ages ago with no supporting evidence, over the writings of more educated people written more recently and in a manner that allows for one to examine the evidence.

Put the strongest human naked in a cage with a grizzly bear and watch the outcome, you will see then that we are just a frightened pathetically little mammal or are we?

Only our minds make as the Alpha being on earth not our brawn

Later documents are not necessarily more accurate, take the dead sea scrolls as an example.

naked ape...

Can we as humans have direct and consequential evolution upon others?

Does by our presence and own evolution evolve other creatures?
Especially apes.

What with the touch screens and reward systems and games in place that some might say are outside of nature or speeding it up in place to teach the apes things they can only learn through our nature not the nature or their nature, does this speed up their evolution?
Do humans actionings upon apes speed up their evolution?

(This line of thinking led me to ask, do we evolve ourselves? do we have control over our evolution? or do we need a trainer that is more than nature? as nature has no self and evolves because of its own nature to do so and be so beacause of its own design, it is the design not the designed maybe not even the designer?)

Later documents are not necessarily more accurate, take the dead sea scrolls as an example. If you insist you are just a naked ape go ahead as for me I insist I have a soul engineered to be divine and exist forever

If we are just an animal then we humans are truly pathetic lot. Put the strongest human naked in a cage with a grizzly bear and watch the outcome, you will see then that we are just a frightened pathetically little mammal or are we? Only our minds make as the Alpha being on earth not our brawn

Evolution can not be denied but the certainty can be claimed. The certainty that we, as we are, was intended. If natures intentions are to reach perfection we are that perfection. Is it possible that modern mans apparent sudden appearance in relative terms, indicate more than evolution.

Actually - pretty much every species currently on earth has appeared 'suddenly' in relative terms.

It doesn't indicate anything - other than species tend to pop up and replace each other on a pretty regular basis.

The last I heard it was something like there's a new one every year or so - compared with the dozens that go extinct. Most of them are pretty small - but we can see in the example of Italian wall lizards, or ring species, that new vertebrate species can arrive pretty quickly.

Nor do I think a species as capable, and even as inclined to, cruelty, ambition, murderousness and rapaciousness as humanity can be described as 'perfect'.

Perfect it evolutionary terms, we have a bit further to go in ethical evolution, but we are getting there.

I do believe we have not inherited any neanderthal genes, is that correct?

Perfect it evolutionary terms, we have a bit further to go in ethical evolution, but we are getting there. I do believe we have not inherited any neanderthal genes, is that correct?

Perfect in evolutionary terms... what is that even supposed to mean?!?

There's a reason it's called evolution and not something like "the pursuit of perfection". If a species can survive with what it has, that's all it needs. The idea of perfection is purely a human construct in this sense, there's no driving force behind evolution that tries to make a perfect creature... If we evolved to become dumber in order to survive, would you call that perfection? I doubt it, but that's because perfection isn't the goal, merely survival.

Now, if you define perfection as the ability to survive as a species, then every species on earth is currently perfect.

What do you think it means? Do you think anything in evolutionary terms can be classified as successful? It has the ability to inhabit almost any environment , overcome any other species in survival. It is the most adaptable for most circumstance, it can swim ,climb, run for long periods. Highly intelligent , more so than any other creature. Do you really want me to go on?

Do you think anything in evolutionary terms can be classified as successful?

Perfection means whatever we associate with it. It is a concept of ideals. A "perfect" human has certain qualities, but everyone has a different idea of what a "perfect" human is.



Yes, as I said I think all species are currently successful, but it is always pending success.

My point is it is a human concept being applied to a scientific theory. I agree that we are more able to adapt in many ways compared to other species, but we also have great ability to destroy ourselves, something that is not shared by other species.

What you have to realize is that evolution doesn't "know" that the world changes, so when the world changes the criterions for success change. If less oxygen is available in the atmosphere, creatures who are able to or are already adapted for that will survive, e.g. be successful.

However that is also why the idea of perfection can not truly apply to evolution, because not only are there a plethora of ways to adapt, but the world things adapt to is also changing.

Can we as humans have direct and consequential evolution upon others?

Sorry, I meant to say is there anything that can be classified just as successful as humans.

You could say the ability to destroy is also a sign of perfection in evolutionary terms. We see even now certain humans have adapted to living with less oxygen in the air. We learn to hold our breath longer if we require it. I cant think of how you could improve the human ability , what major design changes you could create to make it more advanced. It has certain faults but to overcome most of them you would incur other disabilities. Its a good academic game trying to improve the human ability.

I cant think of how you could improve the human ability , what major design changes you could create to make it more advanced.

It depends on your definition of success. Viruses that can jump between multiple species might be considered more successful, because they have multiple evolutionary branches to rely on, if one branch fails they still inhabit other species.



There is a type of eagle who has 60 times better vision than our own, you may not consider that a major design change, but it is certainly much better of an eye.

Having wings would be nice. Being able to breathe above and underwater would be nice. Being able to regenerate our bodies like a flatworm would be nice. Being able to see in low-light conditions would be nice. There are many things that would make us more adaptable, more "perfect", but like someone else said earlier we have a niche when it comes to our biology, just like all other species.

The eagle may fly, so can we

Vriruses have ability but can you really say it compares favourable with the human ability. If you consider even the idea of self awareness as an attribute , what has a virus in comparison.

The eagle may fly, so can we, and have excellent eyes, so could we, but can it swim, can it manipulate tools. The fish can swim ,so can we, but can it climb, fly. By our ability we can equal any and all. You tell me what niche we don't explore or inhabit.

Something seems glaringly wrong here. Maybe it's just me.

*flies away*

You're glossing over the specific way I responded. Start with "It depends on your definition of success", and end with "It depends on your definition of success". Like I already said, I agree with you that we are the most capable, but since that is the case I am pointing out other opinions to further the discussion.

In one sense our technological advancements make us more able, but they also make us codependent. If resources run dry our means become limited. So what we have on the bare of our backs is important, and what I said is we have a biological niche, our bodies were set up pretty much the way they are now before we had this level of brain capacity.

In the end it comes back to pending success, our numbers could be our downfall by means of a powerful airborne germ, virus, etc... our ability to make the planet uninhabitable could be our downfall. There are factors that are unique to us that make our future survival connected to unique barriers. In the same way different species have unique abilities to survive, and hence have dependencies distinct from our own, meaning if certain things we are dependent on vanish over time, then the species that survived were more successful.

Was a bit silly, I admit, just because we can fly ,fly without our own wings. But we can fly.

---------- Post added 02-17-2010 at 02:44 PM ----------

You are prejudging our ability to adapt and survive. Then survival is only one aspect of success , you could say a nuclear disaster would only leave us with cockroaches but do they represent evolutions greatest success?

I still say nature has always by natural selection aimed to succeed and the best succeed. You give me a better example, that in one species has gained the attainment we have. As I say, its not just about surviving every eventuality. We must judge success on more than that simple requirement.

My point is that survival is all that evolution "cares" about, or is concerned with. Maybe I should say it again, I agree with you on most of this. However, I think a better way of saying it is that cockroaches wouldn't represent evolution's greatest success from our definitions of success.

Natural selection is guided by what survives, not what is "best". It is the minimum, not the maximum... a far cry from perfection. One has to appreciate that 99% of species have gone extinct.

"We must judge success on more..." Key word: we, I agree that we should, but if you choose to use an evolutionary framework then the idea of success becomes very different.