I think evolution is true without needing transitional fossils. There have been cases where humans have lived in the wild with no human interaction. They lived like animals, they were not "taught" to live like humans. My point is....
We have to be taught to act as humans, how much more evidence is necessary that we evolved from animals?
we are social human beings, we are taught how to behave when we were younger and we socialize as well
hmm TARZAN hehe
Hello Pretty, nice to see you!
I'm not sure I am clear, do you think we would act like humans or animals if we had no one to teach us to act like humans?
I think some of us in society still or has before acted like an animal with impulsive thinking and actions compared to when we make a rational or logical thoughts and actions.
I think that we will act as animals when we are not socialize, there has been cases where children are put into cage for longest time without human interaction and they talk like animals, and act wildly, they are stunted emotionally etc
I dont know also if at some point Tarzan will have a feeling or a knowledge of A GOD or some sort of higher being if he socialize only with animals?
Most of our knowledge and how we act are I think we get it from socialization other than experience, the intelligence part is a part of genes???
Maybe Tarzan goes to church every Sunday instead of using rational thought. lol . I'm jk. Seriously, I don't think we would have an awareness or would search for an awareness of a God if we weren't taught, I could be wrong. I'm not sure, but I think intelligence is part of the genes as well as our ability to learn and teach more information than any other animal. The thing is, we wouldn't have the ability to learn and teach if we were raised as animals our entire lives. Then we would only be able to teach others to act as animals rather than humans.
That's because they were put into cages. One can remain alone and not wind up as you describe.
We didn't evolve from animals. A human is an animal.
Yes, but those that act like animals rather than humans end up in jail or dead on a lot of occasions.
Umm, you have an interesting view on how animals act. Is it based on something?
Just analyzing how we act on impulses rather than rational thought when we are emotional.
I wanted to add. I did a cage fight. When I looked back on it, I compared it to me being an animal in a cage using my physical abilities to fight instead of rational thinking.
I’ll go with you on this, but how was the first human taught to act like a human? And if this evolved naturally then why would we need to be taught to act like humans.
The way you’ve worded this it doesn’t make much sense to me.
I think this was done through awareness by the first language and writing. A human couldn't act like a human unless there was another human to compare with.
I don't know about "living like animals"...there are some "animals" I wish humans lived more like.....
Like the Bonobo...
I wouldn't mind being a bird.
Mike, when I was in the Marines, many of us acted and lived as animals at times. lol
I think learning and teaching rational thinking is the biggest separation between us and other animals.
Not to go off topic, but isn't this something like the 10th thread you've started about evolution?
I noticed you haven't responded on many of them, are you stalking me and counting? That is weird.
To believe in evolution requires as much faith as believing in creation. Both theories are full of flaws which make both lines of thought irrational.
What are the flaws of evolution compared to religion and how does evolution require faith?
So - because I believe in something that has millions of pieces of evidence and you believe in something that was written in a book 2000 years ago with no evidence - we are making the same leap of faith. I assume you have every respect for evolution in that case.
Do you have a lot of respect for evolution?
"So - because I believe in something that has millions of pieces of evidence"
This is exactly my point. You 'believe' in evolution. Evolution is still a theory and requires belief. Millions of pieces of circumstantial evidence do not prove anything.
Creation is a theory and requires belief.
Both theories are flawed, both have huge gaping holes and both have their devout followers. Science has become the new religion.
Personally, I don't believe in either nor do I believe the subject deserves the amount of time and discussion involved trying to disprove each other.
I know when I was born, I have a rough idea of when I am going to die and neither of these theories means squat.
So - how do you make any decisions ever? If belief in a scientifically proven fact is the same as a belief in an invisible super being - what criteria do you use to make decisions?
Do you service the brakes on your car or do you just believe they will work?
Evolution is not a scientifically proven fact.
Evolution is a theory.
Evolution is both a scientifically proven fact and a theory.
Creationism is a myth.
Now answer the question.
I get the brakes fixed when they need fixing.
Why does one have to believe in either of these two options. Surely you are more open minded than to restrict thinking to just these 2 lines of thought.
One doesn't have to believe anything. What makes you think these are the only options I have considered? Having said that - the proof that we evolved is pretty overwhelming.
Boundless other possibilities arise also.
Not really sure why some one who cannot even be bothered to learn about evolution before expressing an opinion has the gall to suggest I am not open minded.
True, but millions of pieces of "hard" evidence does demonstrate that evolution is more than just theory and requires understanding, not belief.
Creation is NOT a theory, it is an assertion with no observable evidence whatsoever.
You don't understand evolution, do you?
That would most certainly be the typical response from those who wish to believe in magic and learn nothing of the world around them. Well done.
There is only circumstantial evidence pointing to evolution. Evolution is still a theory.
I do no believe in magic or creationism.
Is this the best you can do?
Micro evolution has been empirically proved.
Macro evolution is much slower with complex life. It, also, will be proved.
The generic term, for inherited changes over great lengths of time, is evolution. It is no longer theory.
Do some in-depth study. It's all there for ya.
Complete nonsense appears to be the best you can do.
I think that eventhough both seem to be irrational, the creation theory is just silly, and without Any evidence.
At first I thought evolution was irrational, now I think it is very logical. I think being born with things like "vestiges/tails" makes a pretty solid case that we are not created independently/seperately, but evolved from other animals.
There is also the glaring fact that we "LOOK" like the other animals, as well, ie., nose, mouth, eyes, hair, larynx, etc.
I agree. There is overwhelming evidence that logically relate us coming from other animals with explanations requiring little to no faith to believe.
In my experience, many of those who are so against evolution, and the science behind it, rely on this same science to heal them with scientifically developed medicines and extremely difficult surgery.
When they recover, it was because of "God's will." Funny though, they still want scientifically researched medical care.
There is no proof of the existance of God, and neither is there a proof against it. Science and Faith do not exclude but complement each other.
In the ancient civilizations people believed in their gods, but were also good scientists to raise piramids and invent extremly precise calendars.
Out of curiosity, what do you call it when they don’t recover?
Huh. Good point.
I accept the idea of evolution but what about the evolution of the first living things to come into existence - what could they have evolved from?
I'm not so certain we're the only animals capable of rational thought. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that other animals are far more rational than human animals.
Honestly, I think of humans as animals, and I don't see that as a bad thing.
There isn't another living organism on Earth that has the level of consciousness that humans have. Not a single one even comes close.
As for who taught a human to act like a human, then you would need to go back to when humans first realized that they existed in the first place. And, since there is no physical way to prove who helped humans to act like humans, the evidence you seek can and only be provided by 'religion', because it's the only thing that was directly responsible for teaching others how to act, at that time.
Yes, "religion" is based on a moral/ethic code of conduct, however, it is tied to a higher cause than that of humanity.
And that Cagsil, is the reason why we need to take care about all animals.
That's not really true. We do not need to take care of all animals. The human race uses a lot of different animals for survival, luxury and amusement. We do so, because it's what makes us truly happy and allows us to live a sustained, prolonged life.
The many aspects that many different companies around the world make noise about, like saving certain animals, is absurd. Simply because we need a lot of them for food for survival.
Also remember, in different cultures, certain animals are used for food, but are not the same in all places. Example: Japan, China, Taiwan, Philippines and many other places...cats and dogs are great food sources and taste pleasantly to those of that culture.
In America, killing of cats and dogs, is illegal and can put one in jail.
So, you mean that the "level of consciousness" that we have, is better used to "survival, luxury and amusement"?
Orient cultures negotiate with nature to feed and take care about natural balance.
Apparently you missed something or taking two different parts of two different posts to make your question. And, then added a frown smiley for effect.
You make no sense, because you're trying to interpret what I said.
My words were simple enough to understand. The human being has the highest level of consciousness. We are aware of our own existence and can manipulate your own individual future.
If avoiding been killed, is not manipulating their future and decide if the will live or not; is not considered a change to their future.
Then you can say so.
- I can put a smile anywhere I want, any time
Don't be foolish. If avoiding been killed? You make no sense. Your English language is really bad. Survival for animals in the wild isn't a manipulation of the future. And, to think so, shows your ineptitude to understand the knowledge you've learned. It might help if you knew the difference between manipulating the future and instinctively surviving. If you don't know the difference, then take my advice below.
Do you live your life like this all the time? And, yes, you can put a smiley face...but you didn't put a SMILE...you put something different, which means something completely different. I would have thought you knew that much....yet you're trying to engage in a conversation about Evolution?
Please....just read and learn. This is a spot, I'm sure your parents taught you.....shut up and listen. It helps more than you running your mouth about something you know nothing about.
And, before you jump to any sort of statement....you need to seriously stop in your tracks and evaluate what I've said, because it will only get worse for you from here on.
Just a helpful thought.
We are "animals.
I know I'm picky, picky, picky...lol
I think ya just made and "inadvertant" slip of the "fingers" on the keyboard...:-)
Qwark, you want to put Humans into the same category as animals, then you are more than welcome.
I do not, because I see human beings as a race, not a species. I understand the science behind it, but I'd rather not be a part of the separation tactics used to keep people apart from one another.
Yes, animals and humans, share one thing in common, history. That's it. The Evolution of Human beings, no longer makes them animals, regardless of how they act.
Our awareness/consciousness is much higher, and allows each of us to develop free will thoughts and develop honest actions that can bring what we want.
An animal does not have the ability to talk in English. Nor do they have the ability to consciousness construct complex equations.
So, please let's not get picky.
Oh yes! I will get picky.
To gain my respect, I'm not sure you care about that, you must earn it.
We are "mammals." A "mammal" is an "animal."
If You missed that in "science 101," then you were remiss or 'tokin' and jokin' when ya should have been sittin' and listen'n.
I read your comments carefully.
I am now suspicious about the depth of your "alledged" knowledge in ref to reality.
Not that you give a damn...but that's NP. I judge one by his action and verbal/written expression.
By denying that we humans are not a member of the animal species...you become suspect.
I know what your response is gonna be and don't give a damn that you will demean this response. I won't waste a defensive retort when ya do.
I'll just, meaningfully, consider the source.....:-)
There is no doubt about you being picky.
I respect your right to express your knowledge, but I'm not of the understanding that I require your respect. Which, possibly could never be achieved, for whatever reasons.
I figured you were going to bring this up and because you've a strict line of thinking, leaves you narrow about other people's thoughts or understanding. I've read a lot of your posts too and am fully aware of what you know, as well, as you point of view. However, if you want to continue to put human beings in the same category as another animal, then you do a dis-service to the human race and it's consciousness.
"you become suspect?" Of what exactly?
Yeah, if you want to continue to keep the human race living among or like animals, you'll keep classifying each of them, teach them that they really are no better than the pathetic animals who cannot think for themselves and that's false.
You know what my response is going to be? What are you a psychic? You can read thoughts?
Please, you've been proven many times wrong, and your actions in some places on the threads of the forums, have only been for your foolish amusement, than for learning anything, because you already have your ego on a very high level, thinking you're above others.
At least, I'm trying to include others and not dismiss them.
But, thank you for playing, as usual, you always bring out the worse in people. You might want to consider changing your tactic, because it's doesn't help people learn anything and only causes frustration.
Respectfully, would you expand on this:
"..."religion" is based on a moral/ethic code of conduct, however, it is tied to a higher cause than that of humanity."
What would you like to expand on? Are you reading more into my statement that appears?
There was no interpretation for you to do with my statement. I plainly pointed out, that human beings who existed, long ago were captured by "religion", through the "God-Kings", "Oracles" and "Mystics", all who claimed to have a connection, with some sort of "GOD". Hence, the higher cause other than humanity.
The "GOD" concept was an accident. Many people from that time, relied on others to learn from, simply because their newly acquired awareness had brought them into existence, but really didn't understand their own existence. This lead them to those who had more knowledge or a better understanding.
Therefore, when looking for answers to questions, people could only turn to others who had awareness. Most of the people at that time, were the people who claims powers to talk to the "GOD" concept.
We are part animals, but the fact that we are aware about our own death, having consciousness and creative capabilities is a proof that we have not an animal rationality.
Even some of humans do act as animals.
If there is a dog, a cat, two people, and a hamster in the living room, how many animals are in the living room?
Walt Whitman on Animals:
I think I could turn and live with animals, they are so placid and
I stand and look at them long and long.
They do not sweat and whine about their condition,
They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins,
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God,
Not one is dissatisfied, not one is demented with the mania of
Not one kneels to another, nor to his kind that lived thousands of
Not one is respectable or unhappy over the whole earth.
His last line is false. Other animals get happy and sad just as we do. My St. Bernard also whines when she gets hot.
a egg and a sperm meet. they evolve right before our eyes. its undeniable i think.
There are many unknowns in evolution as for the complexities of the mind and how our mind evolved. It doesn't make me doubt it, but there is still room for improvements.
Well the liberals are the proof for devolution so since there is devolution there must be evolution!
The trouble is, we liberals would become conservatives if we devolved.
ever think that were not suppose to know everything? i mean i hate know it all's. their so dang smarmy .
No. I think what we can learn and know is unlimited.
Thanks. You proved my point. Now maybe you will question whether or not you are limited in what you can or can't know.
by Greg Schweizer 6 years ago
Do you believe in evolution or creation and why? This isn't to judge anyone, just my own curiosity.I don't want anyone getting into religious disagreements over this question. I am just curious how other people feel. Personally I believe in evolution.
by Shakka James 6 years ago
Meaning, I want to know if you think evolution is a process of God's work. If you even believe in evolution.
by Captain Redbeard 11 years ago
I am having a hard time finding the right forum thread for evolution. I couldn't find a thread in the education area or the science area.Anywho, I got to thinking today about the fact that evolution is considered fact now and that there are evidences to prove where we come from. Then I got to...
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 9 years ago
If humans evolved from fish or chimpanzees, why are there still fish and chimpanzees?Many scientists agree that man evolved from fish or chimpanzees. If that is the case, why are there still fish and chimpanzees. Why are there not stages of evolution going on now? There may be a...
by SaiKit 12 years ago
A lot of skeptics made the following logical fallacy:Skeptics: Can you prove that God exists? if not, then you are illogical if you believe in a God that you can't prove to be existing! This is the fallacy of "False Delimma" Just because you can't prove a theory or belief, doesn't mean...
by TheBlondie 12 years ago
Religious people often think the teaching of evolution should be banned, and vice-versa for non-religious people. What id your opinion? Should evolution, creationism, or neither be taught? Why?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|