Albion

Goddidit? And having said that, what exactly have we explained?

Doubting Didymus

Before that we were smaller rna molecules. before that we were but a single small enzyme-like molecule, before that.. there are many theories. One of which you may like: we were replicating clay crystals.

The abiogenesis theory is that whatever the 'first' self replicating thing was, it was very simple, and there are no problems with it happening randomly.

As for Rna being 'biological', I beg to differ. Rna is not 'alive' in any sense of the word that is useful. If you consider Rna to be alive, then replicating clay crystals are alive as well.

Doubting Didymus

I strongly suggest that everyone should go back over this thread and examine the contributions made by vanderzyden, as opposed to those made by the likes of scigirl. I suggest that this was not a discussion, but a powerful and immediate refutation of the idea that humans are extra super dooper special and all apes do is eat.

KeithHarwood

What makes you think apes don't have a mind? Or have you just invented some definition of mind that excludes anyone but humans?

Apes build, dance, sing, cry, reason and have been observed to do so in the wild. Captive apes have been taught to converse and they report that they love, dream and introspect. The only reason you think humans are different from apes is that you are woefully ignorant about apes. (And other remarks you have made elsewhere suggests you are woefully ignorant about humans as well.)

RufusAtticus

Good post, but one little correction:

Apes and hominids are the same, due to reorganization of classifications. Great Apes are now in one family, <a href="http://tolweb.org/tree?group=Hominidae&contgroup=Catarrhini" target="_blank">Hominidae</a>. You probably should be using Hominin instead of Hominid.

The Lone Ranger

Actually, there's no rational classification scheme in which chimpanzees and gorillas are classified as "apes" but humans are not. Chimpanzees are more closely-related to humans than they are to gorillas, and much more closely-related to humans than they are to orangutans.

So, it's misleading to say that humans are like apes, or related to apes. We are apes.

Cheers,

Michael

Doubting Didymus

Either that, or we could use a new term that includes only the most recent branches of apes, i.e. humans and chimps.

Doubting Didymus

I would like to add that phylogenic classification is really fairly senseless. The only 'real' level of classification is species, and even then youve got bloody cryptids mucking it up. The primary function of phylogeny is to be useful to human researchers.

Non-praying Mantis

</strong>

I didn't see you refute the claims made by other posters in that thread, all I saw was you asserting that scientists are wrong and that reason and language are dependent on each other.

I am not sure. Studies with the great apes have shown that they do possess a rudimentary grasp of language, and some have shown they also have reasoning capacity. Why do you insist that they do not, contrary to these studies? Perhaps reason and language developed at the same time, each dependent on the other, slowly improving in our lineage to our present day levels of reasoning and language.

</strong>

One of the things that I have learned from being a biologist is that nature has no true categories. Even at the species level it is hard to determine which organisms go into which species.

Populations of single species have many different characters present, and there are usually more characters that separate species from one another, but this is no hard and fast rule. Some species separate themselves based on only a few characteristics, which would only be discernable to a specialist in the wild, and only through intense examination in the laboratory. I should know. The two species that I worked on in my graduate thesis were very closely related, and were almost identical physically, but we did learn how to separate them properly.

Ususally in biology, we see lots of shades of grey and few distinct lines.

</strong>

As others have pointed out to you in other threads, you may be selling apes short. They are much more complex in their behaviors and social structures than you realize.

Another problem you have understanding is that behavior is often HEAVILY influenced by genes. That is much behavior is instinctual. Even our own. Yes, noone taught your newborn to smile (or cry, or poop his/her diapers, or spit up ), but this behavior was already present in his/her genes. I am an entomologist (I study insects) and it always amazes me how highly developed insect behaviors can be in some species. Insects can spin cocoons, search for food and mates, lay eggs in the proper places, and so forth, and obviously noone is around to teach them. I suppose you think God has to do all of that for them!

No, these behaviors are genetically encoded, just the same as body color, or the particular type of enzymes that break down food. This has even been tested by breeding different species together to form hybrids with varying behavior patterns. Often these hybrids take on behavioral characteristics that fall between the two parent species, and that these traits are passed on to their offspring (if the hybrids can breed at all).

Minds are useful to us because they allow us to compete with other species, and each other. This is why minds evolved.

</strong>

I did not say your granddaddy was an ape. I said your 500,000-great granddaddy was an ape. An ape you should be proud of as well!

Scientists often wonder about such things, and about when living things first appeared, and how they could assemble from non-living parts. The definitions of living and non-living, at this level of existence are still under debate and research. More and more research is performed, and still more is needed to answer this seemingly simple question. Much of what we surmise is hypothetical, but that does not mean that it is wrong, or right. We just don't know for sure, yet.

Noone said that science has all of the answers, but that science is the best way to obtain all of the answers!

I wonder if you think that the question just blew up in my face?

NPM

Non-praying Mantis

Thanks, Rufus, for clearing that up! I am an entomologist, and mammalogy is not my speciality.

NPM