Freethought & Rationalism Archive

You Betcha · 01-03-2002, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth:
From the anatomy which is consistent with the ability of human speech.

So then, from the time you were conceived until you were a couple of years old, you were not truly human (FYI, our anatomy that makes us fully capable of human speech is not fully developed until we're a couple of years old)?

And are parrots, minahs and other birds, which have anatomy that allows them to mimic human speech quite well, partly human?

I hope you are not being serious. I am fairly confident you know the difference between a human and a parrot.

I hope you are not implying that Neanderthals merely mimicked human speech.

Mageth · 01-03-2002, 11:45 AM

So what led you to the conclusion that it has non-turtle ancestors, and why were they lost?

Read and study my other links. A lot of evidence and theories for the non-turtle ancestry of turtles is listed there and elsewhere. Species are "lost" all the time, for any of various reasons, and I don't know the particular reason why the ancestors of the turtles were lost.

You Betcha · 01-03-2002, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daggah:
You Betcha, do you have any intention of looking at the pictures I posted, or are you avoiding them?

What was your score when you first looked? There are two sides of the issue and it is hotly debated. Similarity does not mean relatedness.

Mageth · 01-03-2002, 11:54 AM

I hope you are not being serious. I am fairly confident you know the difference between a human and a parrot.

I'm merely pointing out the fallacy of equating humanity with anatomy consistent with the ability to make human speech. Parrots have anatomy that allows them to fairly well mimic human speech, but they are obviously not human.

I hope you are not implying that Neanderthals merely mimicked human speech.

Not at all. To put it plainly, we do not know how much "human speech" Neanderthals were capable of. Since, AFAIK, the only fossil record of Neanderthals are skeletal, as QoS pointed out, there is no solid anatomical evidence that Neanderthals were capable of speech as seen in Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

Dr Rick · 01-03-2002, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by You Betcha:

Quote:

Neanderthals are human. A higher consciousness is a quality considered distinctive of...mankind.

followed by:

Quote:

[The evidence that Neanderthals had higher consciousness stems] from the anatomy which is consistent with the ability of human speech.

The ability to produce "human" speech does not define consciousness, higher or otherwise.

Computers can produce speech.

[ January 03, 2002: Message edited by: rbochnermd ]

RufusAtticus · 01-03-2002, 12:13 PM

You Betcha,

I'm still waiting for an answer. If you can't answer these questions, then you have no buisness using "kinds" in any argument.

--Repost--

Quote:

You Betcha:
I believe the wolf is a dog-kind.

A kind is a family of animals that could originally reproduce, but can become reproductively incompatible while still retaining the fundamental characteristics of the original animal, i.e. horses and mules, rabbits and other species of animals that cannot reproduce but still are the same kind of animal.

How do you make this determination? Tell us how many species are in the same kind with dogs and wolves. What criteria do you use to place them in together? What evidence do you use to exclude similar, but "unrelated" organisms?

If a similar designer is responsible for the similarities between humans and chimps, how do you know that He isn't responsible for the similarities between dogs and wolves or even you and your relatives?

Quote:

I believe lions, tigers, leopards, and cheetahs are the same kind of animal.

Again, what criteria do you use to say this? Plenty of YECs would not agree with you, and what evidence can you offer that this kind exists and is completely separate from the dog kind.

-RvFvS

Queen of Swords · 01-03-2002, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by You Betcha:


I do not have my information with me now, but there is a part of the anatomy which allows humans, people, mankind to speak differently than animals.

Only one part? Out of the entire human anatomy?

And what exactly is the way in which animals speak? You imply that there is such a way when you use the phrase "speak differently than animals".

When do you plan on having "your information"?

Mageth · 01-03-2002, 12:19 PM

When I say "speak" my dog kind barks.

Queen of Swords · 01-03-2002, 12:22 PM

Well, that's obviously a miracle. Next thing you know, it'll be preaching to you, sort of like Balaam's ass.

You Betcha · 01-03-2002, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RufusAtticus:
You Betcha,

I'm still waiting for an answer. If you can't answer these questions, then you have no buisness using "kinds" in any argument.

--Repost--


Again, what criteria do you use to say this? Plenty of YECs would not agree with you, and what evidence can you offer that this kind exists and is completely separate from the dog kind.

-RvFvS[/QB]

The criteria I use is the family they are in. The canine and feline families, dogs and cats.

01-03-2002, 12:16 PM	#147
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Originally posted by You Betcha: <strong> I do not have my information with me now, but there is a part of the anatomy which allows humans, people, mankind to speak differently than animals.</strong> Only one part? Out of the entire human anatomy? And what exactly is the way in which animals speak? You imply that there is such a way when you use the phrase "speak differently than animals". When do you plan on having "your information"?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-03-2002, 11:45 AM	#142
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	So what led you to the conclusion that it has non-turtle ancestors, and why were they lost? Read and study my other links. A lot of evidence and theories for the non-turtle ancestry of turtles is listed there and elsewhere. Species are "lost" all the time, for any of various reasons, and I don't know the particular reason why the ancestors of the turtles were lost.

01-03-2002, 11:54 AM	#144
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	I hope you are not being serious. I am fairly confident you know the difference between a human and a parrot. I'm merely pointing out the fallacy of equating humanity with anatomy consistent with the ability to make human speech. Parrots have anatomy that allows them to fairly well mimic human speech, but they are obviously not human. I hope you are not implying that Neanderthals merely mimicked human speech. Not at all. To put it plainly, we do not know how much "human speech" Neanderthals were capable of. Since, AFAIK, the only fossil record of Neanderthals are skeletal, as QoS pointed out, there is no solid anatomical evidence that Neanderthals were capable of speech as seen in Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

01-03-2002, 12:19 PM	#148
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	When I say "speak" my dog kind barks.

01-03-2002, 12:22 PM	#149
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Well, that's obviously a miracle. Next thing you know, it'll be preaching to you, sort of like Balaam's ass.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.