Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,057 Year: 5,314/9,624 Month: 339/323 Week: 183/160 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   PRIMATES, AFRICANS, EUROPEANS, EVOLUTION IN REVERSE?
jimmyevolution
Guest


Message 1 of 33 (32858)
02-22-2003 6:35 AM


If Europeans descended from Noah and Africans did as well, what can we derive from the fact that Africans (especially those south of the Sahara) resemble Primates lower on the evolutionary tree like Gorrillas and chimpamzees? This is only an observation I have made it's not intended to be racist in any way. If it is possible for the descendents of Noah to look more and more like Primates lower on the evolutionary tree like Gorrillas and chimpamzees, than where is the cut off line? How much genetic change will a creationalist except until he crosses the line of accepting evolution or maybe evolution in reverse? Could it be possilbe for African people to continue to have more genetic change to eventually look exactly like Gorrillas or chimpanzees?
If you disagree with my assumptions, you need to take a good hard look at the faces of Europeans And Africans (especially those south of the Sahara)and if you deny that my question has merit you are brainwashed and have probably committed intellectual suicide for what you believe to be true. However, if you can rationally and logically convince me that there is a Creationalist explination for my Question, then you will help me make steps to becoming a Christian and you will entirely win my respect.
Jimmy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by judge, posted 02-22-2003 6:56 AM You have not replied
 Message 3 by Gzus, posted 02-22-2003 5:08 PM You replied

  
judge
Member (Idle past 6550 days)
Posts: 216
From: australia
Joined: 11-11-2002


Message 2 of 33 (32860)
02-22-2003 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by jimmyevolution
02-22-2003 6:35 AM


Down with trolls
Trolls make me long for accelerated natural selection

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-22-2003 6:35 AM jimmyevolution has not replied

Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 33 (32884)
02-22-2003 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jimmyevolution
02-22-2003 6:35 AM


There is evidence to show that brain sizes differ across the races, but these differences are relatively small. the average human brain size is around 1350 cm3. caucasians and asians on average have brains 4 cm3 larger than their african cousins, a minute difference, and this difference in size affects primarily the frontal lobe of the brain (responsible for processing emotions) there is some debate about the differences in the structure of their brains. (don't take this for granted though cos i can't remember where i got my info from!). aside from the obvious physical differences, the main differences between the races are hormonal esp. the sex hormones.
There is a theory that states that the modern humans arose in the caucasus after migrating north from Africa and then colonised the world, perhaps (they claim) 'africans' contain more 'primitive' genetic material than the rest of the human race due to interbreeding with other early hominids that stayed in africa, but the evidence points overwhelmingly to a common ancestor for all humans, though the facial characteristics of subsaharan africans particularly the natives of Zaire, may provoke speculations (though unproven) about the genetic history of the african race.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-22-2003 6:35 AM jimmyevolution has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Adminnemooseus, posted 02-22-2003 9:59 PM Gzus has not replied
 Message 7 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 5:04 AM Gzus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Inactive Administrator


Message 4 of 33 (32895)
02-22-2003 9:10 PM


Moving Topic
I am going to copy/move this topic from "Evolution" to "Human Origins".
The "Evolution" version will be closed, and eventually deleted.
Adminnemooseus
------------------
{mnmoose@lakenet.com}

Adminnemooseus
Inactive Administrator


Message 5 of 33 (32896)
02-22-2003 9:12 PM


Thread moved here from the Evolution forum.

Adminnemooseus
Inactive Administrator


Message 6 of 33 (32899)
02-22-2003 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Gzus
02-22-2003 5:08 PM


Take care with this topic
This topic certainly contains the posibilty of some truly ugly racist overtones being part of the discussion.
That said, there does seem to be some valid avenues of discussion available. I must say, however, that this topic is one that any participents should be especially careful with.
Adminnemooseus
------------------
{mnmoose@lakenet.com}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Gzus, posted 02-22-2003 5:08 PM Gzus has not replied

jimmyevolution
Guest


Message 7 of 33 (32911)
02-23-2003 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Gzus
02-22-2003 5:08 PM


HOW MUCH GENETIC CHANGE WILL A CREATIONALIST EXCEPT BEFORE EVOLUTION CREEPS IN?
A study by K. L. Beals, published in Current Anthropology in 1984, reported that a survey of 20,000 skulls shows that the average size of the brain case in Asia is 1380 cc, while in Europe it is 1362 cc and in Africa 1276 cc. The asain brain case was about 8% larger then the african one and the European case was about 6% larger. You said these differences were relitively small but 8% and 6% are numbers that are huge statistically and should not be overlooked for political or religous correctness.
Futhermore, there are other significant differences like onset of puberty, bone density, skeletal differences and a myriad of other physical and social differences.
I know people will debate these assertions, all I can say is read J. Philippe Rushton's book entitled, "Race, Evolution, and Behavior". One will find enough direct and circumstantial evidence therein, to force him/her to reevauate his or her beliefs.
However, my desire is to understand how much genetic change a Creationalist will except, before evolution creeps into the equation.
I want to beleve in Jesus and that God created everything after "it's kind and it's likeness" like Genesis states but my observations of reality prevent me and I can't seem to figure out how to reconcile it all and believe me I do or I wouldn't be here asking all of you. If you have the answer for me please post it up. Futhermore, to all those who feel nerveous about discussing this topic, I'd like to say that the truth will never threaten God and should never make anyone afraid unless that person is afraid of the light.
Jimmy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Gzus, posted 02-22-2003 5:08 PM Gzus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by nator, posted 02-23-2003 8:46 AM You have not replied
 Message 9 by Gzus, posted 02-23-2003 4:13 PM You replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2276 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 8 of 33 (32917)
02-23-2003 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by jimmyevolution
02-23-2003 5:04 AM


Re: HOW MUCH GENETIC CHANGE WILL A CREATIONALIST EXCEPT BEFORE EVOLUTION CREEPS IN?
I would reccomend a book called "The Mismeasure of Man", by S.J. Gould.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 5:04 AM jimmyevolution has not replied

Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 33 (32951)
02-23-2003 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jimmyevolution
02-23-2003 5:04 AM


Re: HOW MUCH GENETIC CHANGE WILL A CREATIONALIST EXCEPT BEFORE EVOLUTION CREEPS IN?
if what you say is correct, (I had no idea that the differences could be so large) then it definitely merits consideration. this topic is very controversial and i think we all know where it's going, but still, it's hard to overlook. The modern philosophy 'all are created equal' (intelligence wise) is quite likely the greatest myth of the late 20th century. The only thing is, people who support science in this area are usually compared to rather unintelligent, fundamentalist scum, 'rednecks' i think you call them. see also 'the decline of intelligence in America' by Seymour W. Itzkoff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 5:04 AM jimmyevolution has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 5:26 PM Gzus has not replied

jimmyevolution
Guest


Message 10 of 33 (32958)
02-23-2003 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Gzus
02-23-2003 4:13 PM


Re: HOW MUCH GENETIC CHANGE WILL A CREATIONALIST EXCEPT BEFORE EVOLUTION CREEPS IN?
I like to preface this post by beseeching all to read my 2 previous entrys on this topic and help me reconcile my dilemma.
This is a discription of the book, "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" by J. Philippe Rushton.
Race, Evolution, and Behavior is one of the best books ever written about on race. It marshals statistics on race differences and provides a comprehensive gene-based evolutionary theory to explain them. It may startle many people to learn just how much information we have on race differences in brain size, intelligence, sexuality, personality, growth rate, life span, crime, and family stability. Also surprising to many will be the consistency with which, on all of these traits, Orientals fall at one end of the spectrum, blacks at the other end, and whites in between.
On average, Orientals are slower to mature, less fertile, and less sexually active, have larger brains and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the opposite end in each of these areas, and whites fall in the middle, often close to Orientals. This pattern is true over time and across nations and this means we cannot ignore it.
Race, Evolution, and Behavior shows that Oriental children are slower to mature than white children while black children are faster to mature. This is true for the rate of bone and tooth development and the age at which a child first sits, crawls, walks, and puts on clothing.
There are also racial differences in sexual activity. Orientals are the least sexually active, whether measured by age of first intercourse, intercourse frequency, or number of sexual partners. Blacks are the most active on all of these measures. Once again whites fall in between. These contrasts in sexual activity lead to differences in the rate of diseases like syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, and chlamydia. There are high levels of AIDS in Africa, black America, and the Caribbean and low levels in China and Japan. European countries again fall in between.
The races differ in rate of ovulation. Not all women produce one egg during the menstrual cycle. When two or more eggs are produced at the same time, a pregnancy is more likely. So is the likelihood of producing fraternal twins (i.e., two-egg twins). The number of twins born is 16 out of every 1,000 births for blacks, 8 out of every 1,000 births for whites, and 4 or less for Orientals. Triplets and other multiple births are rarest in Orientals and highest in blacks, with whites in between.
Much of Race, Evolution, and Behavior is about race and intelligence. Hundreds of studies on millions of people show a three-way pattern. IQ tests are often made to have an average score of 100, with a "normal" range from 85 to 115. Whites average from 100 to 103. Orientals in Asia and the U.S. tend to have higher scores, about 106. Blacks in the U.S., the Caribbean, Britain, Canada, and in Africa average lower IQs -- about 85. The lowest average IQs are found for sub-Saharan Africans -- from 70 to 75.
Prof. Rushton also looks at brain size. Bigger brains have more brain cells and this leads to higher IQs. The races vary in brain size. Some of the reviewed studies are very large. For example, the U.S. Collaborative Perinatal Project followed more than 50,000 children from birth to age seven years. Orientals had larger brains than whites at birth, four months, one year, and seven years. Whites had larger brains than blacks at all ages. In another large study this racial ranking was confirmed in a random stratified sample of 6,325 U.S. Army personnel.
Up until recently most work on race was carried out in the U.S. on differences between whites and blacks. Beginning in the 1970s, however, race research became become global. New statistics emerged on East Asians in the United States, as well as from Hong Kong and Japan. Also, more data began to come in from black populations in Africa, the Caribbean, and Britain. All the data consistently showed a 3-way pattern of race differences.
In the U.S. Orientals are a "model minority." They have fewer divorces, fewer out-of- wedlock births, and fewer reports of child abuse than whites. More Orientals graduate from college and fewer go to prison. On the other hand blacks are 12 percent of the American population and make up 50 percent of the prison population. In the U.S., one out of every three black men is either in jail, on probation, or awaiting trial. That is much more than the number who graduate from college.
Race, Evolution, and Behavior shows that this racial pattern in crime is found worldwide. INTERPOL Yearbooks show that violent crime rates are four times lower in Asian and Pacific Rim countries than in African and Caribbean countries. Whites in the United States and in European countries are in between.
Why Are There Race Differences?
Why does history show Africa trailing behind Asia and Europe? Why do whites average between Orientals and blacks in so many areas? Why do the groups with larger brains have lower rates of two-egg twinning? To know the answer, you must look at all of the traits taken together because they form a pattern. No environmental factor can explain all of them taken together. There is, however, a gene based explanation. The patterns make up what is called a "life-history." They evolved together to meet the trials of life -- survival, growth, and reproduction.
Race, Evolution, and Behavior proposes a gene based "life-history theory" to explain the racial pattern in brain size, intelligence, and other traits. Evolutionary biologists call it the r-K scale of reproductive strategies. At one end of this scale are r-strategies that rely on high reproductive rates. At the other end are K-strategies that rely on high levels of parental care.
On this scale, Orientals are more K-selected than whites, while whites are more K-selected than blacks. Highly K-selected women produce fewer eggs (and have bigger brains) than r-selected women. Highly K-selected men invest time and energy in their children rather than the pursuit of sexual thrills. They are "dads" rather than "cads." These race differences in reproductive strategies make sense in terms of human evolution. Modern humans are thought to have evolved in Africa about 200,000 years ago. Africans and non-Africans then split about 100,000 years ago. Orientals and whites split about 40,000 years ago.
The more north the people went "out of Africa," the harder it was to get food, gain shelter, make clothes, and raise children. So the groups that evolved into today's whites and Orientals needed larger brains, more family stability, and a longer life. But building a bigger brain takes time and energy during development. So, these changes were balanced by slower rates of growth, lower levels of sex hormones, less aggression, and less sexual activity.
Why? Because Africa, Europe, and Asia had very different climates and geographies that called for different skills, resource usage, and lifestyles. Blacks evolved in a tropical climate which contrasted with the cooler climate of Europe in which whites evolved and even more so with the cold Arctic lands where Orientals evolved.
Because intelligence increased the chances of survival in harsh winter environments, the groups that left Africa had to evolve greater intelligence and family stability. This called for larger brains, slower growth rates, lower hormone levels, less sexual potency, less aggression, and less impulsiveness. Advanced planning, self-control, rule-following, and longevity all increased in the non-Africans.
Finally it is worth mentioning that in Chapter 4 of the unabridged edition (not covered in the abridged version) the author presents his "genetic similarity theory" to explain ethnic nationalism. It likens "races" to extended families. Prof. Rushton shows that genes influence why people tend to marry and associate with others like themselves. The important pull of genetic similarity can be felt in small groups and even large ones (national and international). The reason people like and seek genetic similarity and fear and avoid dissimilarity is to be found in the sociobiology of altruism. Altruism toward genetically similar others evolved in order to help replicate similar genes (extended kin). Xenophobia is then seen as the 'dark side' of human altruism. Because ethnic nationalism is part of human nature, the world may face an unending series of upheavals as more and more peoples rise to ethnic self-consciousness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Gzus, posted 02-23-2003 4:13 PM Gzus has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1982 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 11 of 33 (32960)
02-23-2003 5:47 PM


Even a 100 cc average volume differential does not necessarily imply a higher innate 'intelligence'.
What if the difference is in the number of cells in the occipital lobe? Or perhaps a larger thalamus? Or perhaps the brain is more "compressed"?
One needs to exercise caution when making such extensions - often they end up being non sequiturs.

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 7:11 PM derwood has not replied

jimmyevolution
Guest


Message 12 of 33 (32966)
02-23-2003 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by derwood
02-23-2003 5:47 PM


PRIMATES, AFRICANS, EUROPEANS, EVOLUTION IN REVERSE?.... my search continues
Please before you read this, read my first 2 post on this subject because therein lies my main concerns.
all info from American Renaissance or the book "Race, Evolution, and Behavior"
Studies of brain size and weight can be difficult to replicate because researchers do not often have access to enough skulls or cadavers and may use different measuring techniques. A 1989 study overcame these difficulties by using magnetic resonance scanning to determine skull capacity. Brain size was found to have a positive correlation of about 0.3 with intelligence. Futhermonre, studies have found that the brains of American blacks are approximately eight percent lighter than those of American whites.
There is probably no greater intellectual crime than to point out that the average intelligence of blacks is significantly lower than that of other races. American society punishes those who publicly state this view almost as vigorously as Islamic republics punish anyone who defames the Prophet.
In the United States, what little discussion there is about racial differences revolves around intelligence. Study after study has consistently shown that the average black IQ test score is 15 to 18 points lower than the white average. It appears that the gap starts at about 15 points in childhood and widens to as much as 20 points in adulthood. The gap has remained unchanged for 70 yearsever since IQ tests were first given to large numbers of Americans. Civil rights laws, greater social equality, and affirmative action have not reduced the difference.
As is clear from the diagram on this page (not shown here click on link to see in full November 1992 - American Renaissance#) cover, there is considerable overlap between more intelligent blacks and less intelligent whites; some blacks are clearly smarter than some whites. Egalitarians seize on this fact to discount the entire notion of racial differences but this is as absurd as claiming that because some women are taller than some men, the average man is no taller than the average woman.
Despite overlapping intelligence distributions, only 16 percent of blacks have IQs of more than 100, the white average. Whites are six to eight times more likely to have scores in the gifted range of 135 and higher, whereas blacks are six to eight times more likely to have scores in the retarded range of 70 or lower. At the very highest, genius level IQ scores, blacks are hardly to be found at all.
Not even the most reckless egalitarians can deny the differences in test scores. Instead, they claim that the scores are either meaningless or do not measure intelligence. It is true that intelligence cannot be defined to everyone's liking, but that does not mean it cannot be measured. IQ correlates almost perfectly with subjective impressions of intelligence. If you were to talk to five strangers for twenty minutes each and then rank them by intelligence, there is an excellent chance that you would give them the same rank order that an IQ test would.
Less subjectively, IQ tests are the best possible way to predict whether a student will get good grades or a white-collar worker will do a good job. If a test can accurately predict how well someone will do at any number of activities that we think of as requiring intelligence, it takes a peculiar stubbornness to insist that the test is not measuring intelligence.
IQ tests therefore measure what we understand to be intelligence. Blacks consistently score lower than whites on IQ tests. Are they therefore less intelligent than whites?
Test Bias
At this point, the egalitarian defense claims that IQ tests are somehow biased against blacks. Common as this charge is, it is nothing more than an ex post facto explanation for results that displease the egalitarians, for no one can look through a well-designed intelligence test and explain what the bias is and where it is to be found.
In fact, many modern IQ tests, such as Raven's Progressive Matrices, have no verbal or cultural content at all. They test a person's understanding of shapes and patterns, and are routinely given to people who do not even speak English. Other varieties of IQ test do involve language and inevitably have some cultural contentand these are the very tests on which the black/white gap in scores is narrowest. The more culturally specific an intelligence test is, the narrower the black/white gap becomes. The most abstract, culture-free tests show the largest gap.
The theory of test bias is that unfair tests consistently underrate blacks' abilities. If that were true, blacks who got the same test scores as whites would do better than the whites at the things test scores are supposed to measure: they would get better grades and do their jobs better. This does not happen; blacks do no better than the test scores predict. This raises a larger and different issue. Both the tests and the abilities they are supposed to measure may be biased against blacks. Some egalitarians actually make this argument, but it comes dangerously close to arguing that ability and intelligence themselves are somehow biased against blacks.
The cultural bias position is further weakened by the fact that newly-arrived Asian immigrants, for whom the United States really is an alien culture, outperform both blacks and whites on IQ tests. The assertion that the same tests that are culturally biased against blacks somehow favor Asians strains credibility.
If blacks are as intelligent as whites, there must be some way to demonstrate this. None has ever been devised. Are we to conclude that the intelligence of blacks remains forever hidden because every method for measuring it is faulty? Believers in test bias cannot explain why it is impossible to design an intelligence testcarefully eliminating all biason which blacks score as well as whites. The explanation is that there is no bias to eliminate. Bias is an imaginary culprit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by derwood, posted 02-23-2003 5:47 PM derwood has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by derwood, posted 02-23-2003 9:23 PM You have not replied
 Message 14 by Peter, posted 02-24-2003 2:25 AM You replied
 Message 24 by Chavalon, posted 02-24-2003 3:38 PM You have not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1982 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 13 of 33 (32978)
02-23-2003 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by jimmyevolution
02-23-2003 7:11 PM


Re: PRIMATES, AFRICANS, EUROPEANS, EVOLUTION IN REVERSE?.... my search continues
I imagine that jdean would find all of this quite comforting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 7:11 PM jimmyevolution has not replied

Peter
Member (Idle past 1585 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 14 of 33 (33006)
02-24-2003 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by jimmyevolution
02-23-2003 7:11 PM


Re: PRIMATES, AFRICANS, EUROPEANS, EVOLUTION IN REVERSE?.... my search continues
Have there been IQ studies categorised by socio-economic background,
and access to educational facilities?
If there haven't then we cannot rule out a form of bias. IQ
tests are designed to explore a particular type/style of brain
activity. Anyone who has not spent time developing that style
of thinking will do worse than those who have. This is evidenced
by the fact that people who do lots of IQ tests get better at
them, a fact which also casts doubt on both a correlation to
brain size, or the validity of the tests in the first place.
In terms of the other physiological differences, most creationists
accept speciation so they shouldn't have a problem.
The more interesting question, for me, raised by this thread is
covered elsewhere ... how do creationists explain the diversity
of humanity given that we have so few 'common ancestors' (Shem,
Ham, Japheth and wives)?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-23-2003 7:11 PM jimmyevolution has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Gzus, posted 02-24-2003 5:58 AM Peter has not replied
 Message 16 by Gzus, posted 02-24-2003 6:03 AM Peter has replied
 Message 20 by jimmyevolution, posted 02-24-2003 12:19 PM Peter has not replied

Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 33 (33019)
02-24-2003 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Peter
02-24-2003 2:25 AM


Re: PRIMATES, AFRICANS, EUROPEANS, EVOLUTION IN REVERSE?.... my search continues
They explain this with reference to the 'babel incident' i.e. scripture says that after babel, the people of the world were given different languages/cultures, etc (perhaps physical characteristics).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Peter, posted 02-24-2003 2:25 AM Peter has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024