Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmurphy

So being intelligent made modern humans have big brains. Sorry, but this is beyond stupid, too.

It's the mental use that made us intelligent and developed our brains. Don't try to go beyond stupid, just try to understand what I am trying to say.

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 02:30 PM

I remember doing a paper on increasing encephalization through time in primates leading to H. sapiens. None of the data supports the notion that long life spans = big brains. Not that absolute brain size in cc's is more significant than complexity of structure. Relative brain size in regard to body mass seems somewhat more relevant a measure. Ralph Holloway, Dean Falk and lots of others have been working in this area...Harry Jerison, too.

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 02:31 PM

All animals that have complex brains use their brains. Squids have been around a long time and I don't see them getting "smarter with bigger brains" through time

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 02:34 PM

Okay, I must be really bored to be arguing with a guy that calls himself a lamarckian due to epigentics and believes you can "think your brains larger"

ericmurphy · 07-08-2007, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmurphy

So being intelligent made modern humans have big brains. Sorry, but this is beyond stupid, too.

It's the mental use that made us intelligent and developed our brains. Don't try to go beyond stupid, just try to understand what I am trying to say.

It's still beyond stupid. How did we develop the ability to be intelligent in the first place? The brain has to come first.

And in any event, this still is no more evidence for super-long lives of ancient humans than it ever was. You've gotten nowhere with your "argument."

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 02:55 PM

[QUOTE=ericmurphy;4598665]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

It's still beyond stupid. How did we develop the ability to be intelligent in the first place? The brain has to come first.

And in any event, this still is no more evidence for super-long lives of ancient humans than it ever was. You've gotten nowhere with your "argument."

Well sure we had brains before we were "intelligent". We weren't empty headed monkeys running around. "Use" developed the brain though, not a random mutation of the genes... just like "use" develops the muscles.

Y.B · 07-08-2007, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

"Use" developed the brain though, not a random mutation of the genes... just like "use" develops the muscles.

Use keeps the brain active during a person's life time, but mutations are what carry on changes to the next generation.

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_932

All animals that have complex brains use their brains. Squids have been around a long time and I don't see them getting "smarter with bigger brains" through time

Well if the squid or any animal lived a thousand productive years it should be smarter/"know more" then it was at one year. That's the point I am trying to make that if we did live prolonged lifetimes it explains the mental advantage we have.

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y.B

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

"Use" developed the brain though, not a random mutation of the genes... just like "use" develops the muscles.

Use keeps the brain active during a person's life time, but mutations are what carry on changes to the next generation.

Mutations as in random mistakes in the coding or just changes in the DNA that occur throughout life?

Y.B · 07-08-2007, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y.B

Use keeps the brain active during a person's life time, but mutations are what carry on changes to the next generation.

Mutations as in random mistakes in the coding or just changes in the DNA that occur throughout life?

Random (wrt to fitness, that is) mistakes in the coding that get passed on (that is, in germ line cells).

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

07-08-2007, 02:30 PM	#22
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	I remember doing a paper on increasing encephalization through time in primates leading to H. sapiens. None of the data supports the notion that long life spans = big brains. Not that absolute brain size in cc's is more significant than complexity of structure. Relative brain size in regard to body mass seems somewhat more relevant a measure. Ralph Holloway, Dean Falk and lots of others have been working in this area...Harry Jerison, too.

07-08-2007, 02:31 PM	#23
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	All animals that have complex brains use their brains. Squids have been around a long time and I don't see them getting "smarter with bigger brains" through time

07-08-2007, 02:34 PM	#24
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	Okay, I must be really bored to be arguing with a guy that calls himself a lamarckian due to epigentics and believes you can "think your brains larger"

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.