|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Human Intelligence | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Annunaki Inactive Member |
Many people believe that humans evolved from apes, hehe this is partly true, yes we did evolve from apes, but what started it was an altercation of our DNA. It wasn't a God, it wasn't a fluke, but an interferance from an outside source. Long ago, Australopithecus Afarensis (a monkey) was taken, and its genes were mixed with that from the outside source. From then on a rapid evolutionary change would happen eventually creating the Homo Sapien. LOL, many will realize this when they arrive, 12-21-12, Humans will know just exactly how oblivious they have been. It is coming and there is nothing that anyone can do about it. Are you prepared?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
More and more evidence of the need for an LTD Primer forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Annunaki Inactive Member |
NosyNed please enlighten me as to what an LTD primer forum is. I am unaware of its meaning
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
Read over the last dozen or so posts on this thread.
http://EvC Forum: Should Simple be Suspended -->EvC Forum: Should Simple be Suspended I suspect you will have trouble with the need to use evidence and logic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Skeptick Inactive Member |
I apologize for not understanding. Plz help me; substantiate which claim?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Skeptick Inactive Member |
it's difficult to view Darwin as anything but racist. Unfortunately that was the universal view of his time
"Universal view"? So, Darwin's scientific observations were more closely related to the "universal view of his time" than actual science? [This message has been edited by Skeptick, 02-12-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
So, Darwin's scientific observations were more closely related to the "universal view of his time" than actual science? No, but his sociological conclusions may very well have been. Anyway I'm not sure that Darwin himself had made any specific observation of indigenous peoples - it's been a while since I've read the OoS.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
quote: This is one of the most blatant non sequitors I've seen in years. How do you get from point A to point B? Are you saying that because Darwin was racist, he couldn't have been a good scientist? By today's standards, George Washington would be considered a racist. Does this mean he wasn't a good president? The Apostle Paul was a racist and a sexist. Does this mean we can finally throw out those wretched Pauline epistles? [This message has been edited by berberry, 02-12-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Are you prepared? For aliens? Tin-foil hat: $10Pliers to pull out bugged teeth: $5 Homebrew diesel fuel/fertilizer bomb: $400 Foiling alien conspiracy: Priceless
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Skeptick Inactive Member |
Anyway I'm not sure that Darwin himself had made any specific observation of indigenous peoples - it's been a while since I've read the OoS.
Darwin refers to them repeatedly in his writings. Quote:The inability to move the ears in man and several apes is, however, partly compensated by the freedom with which they can move the head in a horizontal plane, so as to catch sounds from all directions. It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla (31. Mr. St. George Mivart, ‘Elementary Anatomy,’ 1873, p. 396.); and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro. - Charles Darwin, Descent of Man, page At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world.- Charles Darwin, Descent of Man The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.- Charles Darwin, Descent of Man Even the most distinct races of man are much more like each other in form than would at first be supposed; certain negro tribes must be excepted, whilst others, as Dr. Rohlfs writes to me, and as I have myself seen, have Caucasian features.- Charles Darwin, Descent of Man ...It is a remarkable circumstance, that the difference between the sexes, as regards the cranial cavity, increases with the development of the race, so that the male European excels much more the female, than the negro the negress. Welcker confirms this statement of Huschke from his measurements of negro and German skulls...- Charles Darwin, Descent of Man
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Darwin refers to them repeatedly in his writings. No, I meant observations that he himself had made, with his own eyes. This is stuff that it sounds like he heard from other people.
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. That's speculation, not observation.
Welcker confirms this statement of Huschke from his measurements of negro and German skulls... Off-topic, but you ought to pick up Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man" for a look at the history of the pseudoscience of craniometry and IQ determinism. It's a great read.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Skeptick Inactive Member |
How do you get from point A to point B? Are you saying that because Darwin was racist, he couldn't have been a good scientist?
Speaking of non sequitur. Crashfrog was the one who started with term "universal view".As for Darwin, he refers to Negroes in his writing as if they were far less developed than whites. Are you embarassed about that? But help me here a little. Did the Negroes evolve from the white races (whichever white race you wish to select), or vice versa? Or if they evolved tother, then what creature is at the fork (where we split)?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Crashfrog was the one who started with term "universal view". Well, I suppose there was somebody in 1859 who wasn't a racist... can we agree that it was the prevalent view, at least?
Are you embarassed about that? No more embarassed than I am that Shakespeare writes about Jews the way he does. No more embarassed than I imagine you are that Paul says in 1st Timothy "I suffer not a woman to teach, or usurp authority over a man, but to be in silence."
Did the Negroes evolve from the white races (whichever white race you wish to select), or vice versa? Does race even exist? That's debatable, though off-topic. Populations in Africa, however, posess greater diversity than populations in Europe or Asia, suggesting that the peoples of Europe and Asia are the decendants of populations that migrated out of Africa. So, yes. We evolved together. The common ancestor is a population of humans in Africa. [This message has been edited by crashfrog, 02-12-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Skeptick Inactive Member |
Populations in Africa, however, posess greater diversity than populations in Europe or Asia, suggesting that the peoples of Europe and Asia are the decendants of populations that migrated out of Africa. So, it sounds to me like Europeans are further advanced/evolved than Savages and Negroes like Darwin leads his readers to believe?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
So, it sounds to me like Europeans are further advanced/evolved than Savages and Negroes like Darwin leads his readers to believe? No, this is a misaprehension on a few counts: 1) It implies there is progress. Evolution simply fits organisms to the current environment. It could be that the populations that left africa have been subject to pressures that make them smaller (less food abundance), weaker (more use of tools) and not as smart (less pressure dealing directly with predators). There is no automatic "better" with time. 2)The greatest diversity is in Africa. If there is a "better" and "poorer" they could both well be there. 3)The differences between human populations across the globe are very, very small. It doesn't seem likely there would be any that are really much "better" than any other. [This message has been edited by NosyNed, 02-12-2004]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024