Charlie

Yes I think everyone has done a good job of showing that animals do have science. So when you get a chance perhaps change direction and ask him..

"Why don't animals have religion?"

Biff the unclean

Well there's the angler fish, it practices something very similar to Christianity. It's a deep-sea fish with a long thin spine growing from its head with a bioluminescent blob on the end of it. When a passing fish stops to oooh and ah over the little shining light in the darkness the Angler gobbles him right up.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Humans are much less different from animals than I previously thought.

-Nick

Kthulhu

Some good retorts here and I regretably don't have anything to add but I just wanted to say that this was one of the funniest things I've heard in awhile. :notworthy :notworthy

~The Thing That Should Not Be

Quantum Ninja

Since we're talking about religious animals, don't forget the obvious one: the Praying Mantis!

Here's a good description I found off the Web. It sounds remarkably like a few Xians I've met.

callmejay

Humans aren't that weak! We're like your jack-of-all-trades, we run okay, we fight okay, we climb okay, we swim okay, we forage okay, etc. We could hold our own against most animals out there probably.

TheAlmightyFeaz

Great, now there's two of them...
Anyway here's the responses.

Enrius

Legend Keeper-Very well, then. Where is the evidence of such an ability? The evidence lies in technology. No species has technology but humans.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And, uhhhh...... Isn't that the entire idea of natural selection? That only the best survive therefore producing what is better? How on Earth is that an error?

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Ezekiel-I can agree that an animal can LEARN, but they cannot draw conclusions. They can associate memory with events, but that is not the same as drawing a conclusion.

Also, a chimp will not search for the "perfect termite stick". They will deal with the stick they find, and if they find a good stick they will get a better pull. They can't repeat the progress they make; that means it is not science.

Legend Keeper-Ah, you have put my point better than I was able. So, why don't they? That's the question.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
True, I will not argue that. However, as you state yourself, it is not nearly as sofisticated. Primates have been around longer than humans according to evolution, so why has no primate developed technology on the scale humans do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But are we not physically weaker than the very primates you claim we evolved from? Even so, I again refer to my orgional point. Intellegence and the ability to develop technology on the scale humans do has proven so beneificial, evolution offers no reason that no other species has such an ability but humans. According to natural selection, only the strongest and smartest survive. So, why hasn't any animal's intellegence reached our level?

Quantum Ninja

Ezekiel-I think you have a point, but why is it that the intelligence of humanity has not increased? If intelligence is our strongest trait, why have we not had any advancements in it? That does not concur with your argument.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree that it is possible for small pockets of order to exist in a large system of chaos.. However, a probability experiment has shown that it SHOULD take approximately 10 billion years for a creature of human-type intelligence to evolve(from the beginning of a planet's life). That is unusual, considering the earth has only existed for about 4 billion years.


Legend Keeper-So, why are humans the only species who can overcome such weaknesses?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I know what a fractal is, well, to a certain degree. I am full well aware of the possibility that the stars' positions is actually mathematically determined by a fractal. I know that it approaches chaos, but, as we see in the stars, the system breaks down. The star continually fuses its materials until it either runs out or becomes critical and supernovas. It destroys itself, not continually adapts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh yes it is. It is very surprising to me that a few atoms would combine just the right way on their own to form a protien and that the protiens that formed randomly would randomly bond exactly correctly to form the first cell. Life is such an astounding thing that you ought be amazed at it no matter how you think it formed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I see what you are saying, but this pi is not a working system. It cannot be affected by time. It's existance is not in any of the four dimensions that we are aware we percieve.

Don't systems still break down given time? Look at life, even. Cells continually divide, and unless the person dies first (which is usually the case), eventually those cells will begin to break down because of the fact that each cell is slightly deficient. I can't remember the details of this, but you probably know what I'm refering to. I'm talking about the fact that cells become increasingly unstable when they split.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now to introduce another point.

Consicousness. Evolution does not account for it.

Biff the unclean

I make my living working with gorillas who speak ASL, who understand spoken English and who can read and write. When I read about Xians slandering chimps it makes me want to shout. This guy knows nothing about chimp behavior. Chimps are not just tool users they are toolmakers. A chimp will search out a serviceable termite stick and will then proceed to modify it into a perfect tool. And that is science and engineering. Also western chimps have been observed using and modifying stone tools, not just sticks.
They have no difficulty at all in drawing a conclusion.
Today's primates have been around for exactly the same amount of time as humans, down to the second. We are primates. We didn't descend from chimps. The chimps and us descended from the same ancestor. We are a species of chimp.

According to natural selection, only the strongest and smartest survive. So, why hasn't any animal's intellegence reached our level?
Natural selection says absolutely nothing of the sort.
And the intelligence of sperm whales probably exceeds ours.
I think you have a point, but why is it that the intelligence of humanity has not increased?
What the hell is he talking about? Our brains are over twice the size of those of early humans
probability experiment has shown that it SHOULD take approximately 10 billion years for a creature of human-type intelligence to evolve(from the beginning of a planet's life). That is unusual, considering the earth has only existed for about 4 billion years.
Liar, liar; pants on fire

Evolution completely accounts for consciousness.

Who are these people? Did none of them ever take high school science? I can't turn on the TV without seeing a cable show about evolution or natural history. Don't these kids even watch the tube? How is it possible to remain so ignorant in this day and age?

Quantum Ninja

Some people just don't understand evolution theory. It doesn't mean that a species characteristics are guaranteed to get better or more advanced over time. It means that individuals who have certain characteristics more suited to their environmental conditions are more likely to surive and pass on their genes to a new generation. This, in the long run, can cause a species to evolve in a direction that is more suitable for survival in the current conditions, but doesn't necessarily mean it will become more "advanced."

Note: the word evolution really only means a change in the genetic composition of a population from generation to generation. For instance, a population that goes from 50% blondes in one generation to 60% in the next is an example of evolution. Evolution is a naturally observed phenomenon, like lightning or tidal changes. You really can't refute that concept.

So why are humans no longer evolving in the direction toward a more advanced intelligence? Well, put quite simply there isn't really a "need" for it. Our intelligence has evolved to the point where we've basically become capable of separating ourselves from the natural world, where our survival is no longer determined by environmental conditions. We no longer adapt to the environment, we adapt it to our needs. Ask yourself this question: do extremely intelligent people have a greater chance of surviving in today's world? You're answer should be no. Any Joe Schmoe off the streets with an IQ of 50 is just about as likely to pass on his genes as a genius with an IQ of 150. Therefore, there is no significant change in the percentage of smarter people, and therefore no evolving in the direction toward more advanced intelligence.

Asking why our intelligence hasn't developed further at this point in history is similar to asking why all humans don't have blonde hair. There are no survival benefits to having blonde hair, so the human species hasn't completely evolved in the direction of having blonde hair. A similar thing could be said about intelligence in modern societies.

Lobstrosity

If this debate is mainly on evolution you might find some good information by posting the questions/arguments in the E/C forum...