Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 01-03-2002, 01:20 PM

Pandas may be their own kind.

Good dodge, but since pandas are classified in the same family as ring-tailed cats, coatis, and raccoons, among others, and since you equate "kind" with "family," you should know that pandas are of ring-tailed cat "kind."

Damn, a panda sure doesn't look like a ring-tailed cat. Looks kinda more like a bear, doesn't it? Why didn't god just put it in the bear kind?

hyzer · 01-03-2002, 01:39 PM

You Betcha v. Patrick

The Black Knight vs King Arthur

BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.

ARTHUR: So be it! [Draws Excalibur] [Short fight, Arthur chops the Black Knight's
left arm off]

ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.

BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch.

ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm's off!

BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn't.

ARTHUR: Well, what's that then? [points with his sword to the Knight's left arm on
the ground]

BLACK KNIGHT: I've had worse.

ARTHUR: You liar!

BLACK KNIGHT: Come on you pansy! [Another short fight, the Knight charges Arthur
with his sword. Arthur chops the Black Knight's right arm off]

ARTHUR: Victory is mine!

BLACK KNIGHT: Haa [Black Knight kicks Arthur in the head]

BLACK KNIGHT: Come on then.

ARTHUR: What?

BLACK KNIGHT: Havaityou!

ARTHUR: You are indeed brave, Sir knight, but the fight is mine.

BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh?

ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard, you've got no arms left.

BLACK KNIGHT: Yes I have.

ARTHUR: Look!

BLACK KNIGHT: It's just a flesh wound.

StrongMan · 01-03-2002, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ps418:


Excellent. I will make my first post later today or tomorrow. I will be gone until the 10th, at which point I will read your reply and reply to it. See you on the battlefield.

YES!!! I can't wait for this! I would say zap his ass back to the stone age, but he seems to still be living there.

Mageth · 01-03-2002, 01:42 PM

I'd say he's of the turtle kind, but has evolved to where his head never comes out of its shell.

Dr Rick · 01-03-2002, 01:48 PM

...his head is not up his shell, but somewhere else dark and smelly.

Orpheous99 · 01-03-2002, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:
Originally posted by You Betcha:

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

Computers can produce speech.

Plus they have been doing some amazing things in communicating with chimps and gorillias using sign language. Also, when they put a mirror in front of these primates they know that it is them and not another primate, so they have self awareness. Other animals only see another animal.

Queen of Swords · 01-03-2002, 03:02 PM

You Betcha... I betcha you forgot all about these easy-to-answer questions.

Originally posted by You Betcha:

A higher consciousness is a quality considered distinctive of man or woman, mankind.

You said "qualities" earlier; now you post only one quality. Are there more?

Could you give details of this "higher consciousness"? For example, what are we "conscious" of? Is there such a thing as a "lower consciousness"? If so, what is the difference between "higher" and "lower"? If not, why add the "higher" part?

And I'm curious as to who, besides you, considers "a higher consciousness" to be a quality distinctive of humankind. Is this is a widespread creationist belief?

ksagnostic · 01-03-2002, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by You Betcha:


It was the anatomy of the laryngeal which is consistent with speech that is not inferior to modern man's.

I assume you mean the anatomy of the larynx, or the speech tract, because I don't know what the "laryngeal" is. Also, whether the Neanderthal speech tract was conducive to producing conversational human speech as we hear it today is, to say the least, a controversial proposition. I am familiar with the claims of Philip Lieberman that the Neanderthal vocal tract more closely resembled the typical mammalian vocal tract (where the larynx is situated higher, rendering the pharynx shorter). I am also aware of some counterclaims. What is your source for your claim that the Neanderthal "laryngeal" was not inferior to modern mans?

Note: If your source is that idiot orthodontist, consider yourself palm slapped on the forehead.

Quote:

Maybe you have noticed that humans speak differently than animals.

As a speech language pathologist, I have noticed that. But I wasn't aware that it was due to a difference between "laryngeals".

RufusAtticus · 01-03-2002, 07:40 PM

"Laryngeal" is an adjective meaning "relating to the larynx."

In linguistics it is a noun refering to a class of sounds found in some languages. In Indo-European linguistics "laryngeal" refers to certain sounds that no longer exist but played an important role in language evolution. (They were once thought to have been laryngeals, and the misnomer has stuck.)

Clearly, You Betcha doesn't understand what he frothing about.

-RvFvS

01-03-2002, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Also, when they put a mirror in front of these primates they know that it is them and not another primate, so they have self awareness.

I, personally, cannot think of a more literal test of self-awareness. I don�t see how it gives a good notion at all of the recursive cognitive capacity of a creature.

01-03-2002, 03:02 PM	#177
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	You Betcha... I betcha you forgot all about these easy-to-answer questions. <strong>Originally posted by You Betcha: A higher consciousness is a quality considered distinctive of man or woman, mankind.</strong> You said "qualities" earlier; now you post only one quality. Are there more? Could you give details of this "higher consciousness"? For example, what are we "conscious" of? Is there such a thing as a "lower consciousness"? If so, what is the difference between "higher" and "lower"? If not, why add the "higher" part? And I'm curious as to who, besides you, considers "a higher consciousness" to be a quality distinctive of humankind. Is this is a widespread creationist belief?

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

01-03-2002, 01:20 PM	#171
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Pandas may be their own kind. Good dodge, but since pandas are classified in the same family as ring-tailed cats, coatis, and raccoons, among others, and since you equate "kind" with "family," you should know that pandas are of ring-tailed cat "kind." Damn, a panda sure doesn't look like a ring-tailed cat. Looks kinda more like a bear, doesn't it? Why didn't god just put it in the bear kind?

01-03-2002, 01:39 PM	#172
hyzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: philadelphia Posts: 1,844	You Betcha v. Patrick The Black Knight vs King Arthur BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man. ARTHUR: So be it! [Draws Excalibur] [Short fight, Arthur chops the Black Knight's left arm off] ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary. BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch. ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm's off! BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn't. ARTHUR: Well, what's that then? [points with his sword to the Knight's left arm on the ground] BLACK KNIGHT: I've had worse. ARTHUR: You liar! BLACK KNIGHT: Come on you pansy! [Another short fight, the Knight charges Arthur with his sword. Arthur chops the Black Knight's right arm off] ARTHUR: Victory is mine! BLACK KNIGHT: Haa [Black Knight kicks Arthur in the head] BLACK KNIGHT: Come on then. ARTHUR: What? BLACK KNIGHT: Havaityou! ARTHUR: You are indeed brave, Sir knight, but the fight is mine. BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh? ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard, you've got no arms left. BLACK KNIGHT: Yes I have. ARTHUR: Look! BLACK KNIGHT: It's just a flesh wound.

01-03-2002, 01:42 PM	#174
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	I'd say he's of the turtle kind, but has evolved to where his head never comes out of its shell.

01-03-2002, 01:48 PM	#175
Dr Rick Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: USA Posts: 5,393	...his head is not up his shell, but somewhere else dark and smelly.

01-03-2002, 07:40 PM	#179
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	"Laryngeal" is an adjective meaning "relating to the larynx." In linguistics it is a noun refering to a class of sounds found in some languages. In Indo-European linguistics "laryngeal" refers to certain sounds that no longer exist but played an important role in language evolution. (They were once thought to have been laryngeals, and the misnomer has stuck.) Clearly, You Betcha doesn't understand what he frothing about. -RvFvS

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.