Churches rejecting science altogether

[grannymh]

Humans are animals. We clearly are not plants or fungus. Forget Darwin, just look at the entities. Ask your doctor next time you visit if you are an animal. Be open to the truth.

The misinformation you quoted in this thread on macro-evolution is known to be incorrect, and is generally a misuse of the term macro-evolution. Interspecial change has been witnessed. We have also witnessed that some speciation derives from “immature development” of an animal - a change in protein synthesis rather than in DNA. (DNA messages are interpreted differently rather than changed.) As mutuation then occurs speciation occurs. Dogs and wolves appear to be an example of this.

Animals consist of matter just as plants and fungus.

 

[kbachler]

Evidence of what?

Anything.

 

[kbachler]

How do you observe thought and ideas?

That would depend on context. Sometimes you don’t, and in those cases its not evidence. Sometimes the thoughs/ideas are expressed, either directly or are inferred through action. That sometimes provides answers to questions such as motivaion.

Not sure of the point of your question.

 

[davidv]

That would depend on context. Sometimes you don’t, and in those cases its not evidence. Sometimes the thoughs/ideas are expressed, either directly or are inferred through action. That sometimes provides answers to questions such as motivaion.

Not sure of the point of your question.

The point was to show the problem with your request for observable differences between humans and animals. The key differences are immaterial and cannot be directly observed.

 

[PerfectTiming]

How do you observe thought and ideas?

Quite easily. There are many methods used by psychologists to research thoughts and ideas, which requires being able to observe them in some way.

 

[davidv]

Quite easily. There are many methods used by psychologists to research thoughts and ideas, which requires being able to observe them in some way.

Are the actual thoughts and ideas observed? Or is it only their effects?

 

[kbachler]

Are the actual thoughts and ideas observed? Or is it only their effects?

The expression of thoughts is observed. Other than some new experimental technology which display thoughts on a screen (and that is arguably still a representation) actual thoughts are not observed, except by th person with the thought. But then actual thoughts aren’t used as evidence either, except by the person with the thought…

 

[kbachler]

The point was to show the problem with your request for observable differences between humans and animals. The key differences are immaterial and cannot be directly observed.

I don’t see why that is a problem. Seems to me it confirms the point that humans are animals.

 

[davidv]

I don’t see why that is a problem. Seems to me it confirms the point that humans are animals.

How?

 

[kbachler]

How?

Because there are no notable differences to remove them from the set of things that constitute animals.

 

[grannymh]

This is why churches should not reject science altogether.

Human nature, in itself, unites the material and spiritual worlds. Material evidence can provide information about the material world. Spiritual (non-material) evidence can provide information about the spiritual and material worlds. Material evidence can also provide glimpses of the spiritual world.

Science is used as a source of information about our material/physical world.
However, as a source of natural (material) information based on material evidence, science cannot absolutely rule out the supernatural (spiritual) world known by humans since primeval times.

Blessings,
granny

Divine Revelation trumps.

 

[davidv]

Because there are no notable differences to remove them from the set of things that constitute animals.

Sounds like a pretty unscientific assertion to me.

 

[dnar]

by Andrew Lansdown

No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.’ So began a feature article on evolution in TIME magazine (‘How Man Began’, March 14, 1994). The more I thought about this sweeping statement the more I began to warm to it.

For example, like humans, apes have well formed rational faculties. Their ability to develop an argument, follow a line of logic, draw conclusions and frame hypotheses is quite remarkable.

Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful.

The apes’ ability to codify language in writing is further proof of their close relationship to humans. In this respect, it was most gratifying to see the number of apes who wrote to TIME magazine in response to the article on ‘How Man Began’. I was particularly interested to follow the line of reasoning of the orang-utan who argued that apes had evolved from humans, not vice versa.

Like humans, apes also have a strong spirit of inquiry. Their research in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, medicine and physics is noteworthy.

Apes also (again, like humans) yearn for meaning in life. This is why they devote so much of their time to philosophy, theology and ethics. The religious sentiments and practices of all apes can be traced back to their intense and endless quest for meaning.

Apes are concerned about questions not only of origin but also of destiny. The best proof I can offer for this claim is the maxim by one famous ape philosopher who said, ‘Whether my life leads ultimately to the dirt or to the Judgment, either way, I’ve got a problem.’

Apes also have, like humans, a refined aesthetic sense. They admire beauty and long to surround themselves with it. When an ape cultivates a garden, puts flowers in a vase, or hangs up a painting, what is it doing if not expressing a love of beauty?

Again like humans, apes have a strong creative impulse. This is seen in their poetry, painting, dance, drama and music. To a lesser extent their creativity is also evident in the way they gather in weekly craft groups to weave baskets, spin wool, knit shawls, and cover photo albums.

The sense of humour shared by all apes is another proof of their close kinship to humans. Their delight in the ridiculous and their love of a good laugh is plain from the popular ape jokes they tell.

Reason, language, inquiry, wonder, longing, religion, morality, aesthetics, creativity, imagination, aspiration and humour … such intangible but fundamental qualities are by no means unique to humans, as I hope I have conclusively shown. Therefore, in the profound words of TIME magazine: ‘No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals’.

This being the case, Christians are plainly wrong to insist that humans and animals are vastly different. And they are also obviously wrong to insist that this difference arises from the fact that God created us humans in His own likeness. And if they are wrong to insist that God made us in His own likeness, then they are wrong to insist that God has any claim on us.

Furthermore, if God has no claim on us, then we are free — free to be animals like our evolutionary ancestors — free to be as low-down as snakes, and to make pigs of ourselves, and to act like donkeys.

Did I say ‘free’?

Hiss! Oink! Hee-haw!

 

[kbachler]

Sounds like a pretty unscientific assertion to me.

Why? And if it is, then it should be quite simple to list differences. You only need one to demonstrate the assertion false.

We have blood, flexible cells, bones, brain, nerves, hormones, similar organs (we’ve even transplanted the organs of lower animals into humans), similar DNA (chimps are even 97%-98% the similar), similar senses.

Scientists, biologists, medical practitioners typically refer to humans as animals. We are primates, like other primate animals. If there is a difference, just show it.

 

[davidv]

Why? And if it is, then it should be quite simple to list differences. You only need one to demonstrate the assertion false.

We have blood, flexible cells, bones, brain, nerves, hormones, similar organs (we’ve even transplanted the organs of lower animals into humans), similar DNA (chimps are even 97%-98% the similar), similar senses.

Scientists, biologists, medical practitioners typically refer to humans as animals. We are primates, like other primate animals. If there is a difference, just show it.

Our ability to choose to do other than our natural urges is unique to humans. An immortal soul is unique to humans. A rational intellect is unique to humans.

And no I don’t have an material proofs of the features as they are immaterial. Likewise you have no evidence that the don’t exist.

 

[kbachler]

by Andrew Lansdown

No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.’ So began a feature article on evolution in TIME magazine (‘How Man Began’, March 14, 1994). The more I thought about this sweeping statement the more I began to warm to it.

For example, like humans, apes have well formed rational faculties.

This appears true, since some apes have been able to do arithmetic and show language skills, even creating new words.

Their ability to develop an argument, follow a line of logic, draw conclusions and frame hypotheses is quite remarkable.

Again, appears to be true when compared against most other animals.

Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful.

Koko, the gorilla, had a vocabulary of about 2,000 words.

The apes’ ability to codify language in writing is further proof of their close relationship to humans. In this respect, it was most gratifying to see the number of apes who wrote to TIME magazine in response to the article on ‘How Man Began’. I was particularly interested to follow the line of reasoning of the orang-utan who argued that apes had evolved from humans, not vice versa.

Limited writing, but they do draw. You can see some of their pictures here: koko.org/world/art.html

Like humans, apes also have a strong spirit of inquiry. Their research in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, medicine and physics is noteworthy.

They’re curiosity mainly revolves around food, although they have been seen to lie, plan war, and to figure out problems, primarily in obtaining food.

l
Apes also (again, like humans) yearn for meaning in life. This is why they devote so much of their time to philosophy, theology and ethics. The religious sentiments and practices of all apes can be traced back to their intense and endless quest for meaning.

Meaning is less clear. Apes have been witnessed mourning death, enjoying sex, playing, enjoying humor.

Apes are concerned about questions not only of origin but also of destiny. The best proof I can offer for this claim is the maxim by one famous ape philosopher who said, ‘Whether my life leads ultimately to the dirt or to the Judgment, either way, I’ve got a problem.’

Evidence here is limited, although there is some, mainly related to acknowledging death. Still, they also plan war, which shows foresight.

Apes also have, like humans, a refined aesthetic sense. They admire beauty and long to surround themselves with it. When an ape cultivates a garden, puts flowers in a vase, or hangs up a painting, what is it doing if not expressing a love of beauty?

Again like humans, apes have a strong creative impulse. This is seen in their poetry, painting, dance, drama and music. To a lesser extent their creativity is also evident in the way they gather in weekly craft groups to weave baskets, spin wool, knit shawls, and cover photo albums.

Note the drawings above.

The sense of humour shared by all apes is another proof of their close kinship to humans. Their delight in the ridiculous and their love of a good laugh is plain from the popular ape jokes they tell.

Sense of humor has been observed. See Goodall for example.

Reason, language, inquiry, wonder, longing, religion, morality, aesthetics, creativity, imagination, aspiration and humour … such intangible but fundamental qualities are by no means unique to humans, as I hope I have conclusively shown. Therefore, in the profound words of TIME magazine: ‘No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals’.

This being the case, Christians are plainly wrong to insist that humans and animals are vastly different. And they are also obviously wrong to insist that this difference arises from the fact that God created us humans in His own likeness. And if they are wrong to insist that God made us in His own likeness, then they are wrong to insist that God has any claim on us.

Furthermore, if God has no claim on us, then we are free — free to be animals like our evolutionary ancestors — free to be as low-down as snakes, and to make pigs of ourselves, and to act like donkeys.

Did I say ‘free’?

Hiss! Oink! Hee-haw!

Pretty funny that you attempted to use this to make a point, when in fact many of the things that were quoted as separating us from apes have actually been demonstrated by apes.

Thank you for proving the point that we ARE animals.

 

[kbachler]

Our ability to choose to do other than our natural urges is unique to humans.

This statement has been demonstrated to be false with chimps, during the tests in which chimps were taught arithmetic.

An immortal soul is unique to humans.

So far as I know, I agree, although I don’t know that God would never grant something similar to an animal.

A rational intellect is unique to humans.

This has already been demonstrated to be false with apes, chimps, dolphins and even dogs.

For example, Chaser has been shown to be able to reason out the name for something when given a new word.

And no I don’t have an material proofs of the features as they are immaterial. Likewise you have no evidence that the don’t exist.

It is generally impossible to prove non-existence, so that argument is not allowed by logic. The weight is on you to prove existence.

Not only have you NOT done that, but many of the so-called differences you quote are not differences at all.

 

[davidv]

This statement has been demonstrated to be false with chimps, during the tests in which chimps were taught arithmetic.

So far as I know, I agree, although I don’t know that God would never grant something similar to an animal.

This has already been demonstrated to be false with apes, chimps, dolphins and even dogs.

For example, Chaser has been shown to be able to reason out the name for something when given a new word.

It is generally impossible to prove non-existence, so that argument is not allowed by logic. The weight is on you to prove existence.

Not only have you NOT done that, but many of the so-called differences you quote are not differences at all.

You are free to believe this if you so choose. As far as I can tell all these supposed similarities are question begging projections and anthropomorphisms. God said He created us in His image, not in the image of the animals.

 

[Shredderbeam]

No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.’ So began a feature article on evolution in TIME magazine (‘How Man Began’, March 14, 1994). The more I thought about this sweeping statement the more I began to warm to it.

It seems fairly clear to me that the author intended to say that the differences between other animals and humans is one of degree, not one of kind.

 

[grannymh]

Why? And if it is, then it should be quite simple to list differences. You only need one to demonstrate the assertion false.

We have blood, flexible cells, bones, brain, nerves, hormones, similar organs (we’ve even transplanted the organs of lower animals into humans), similar DNA (chimps are even 97%-98% the similar), similar senses.

Scientists, biologists, medical practitioners typically refer to humans as animals. We are primates, like other primate animals. If there is a difference, just show it.

You may post any published research (especially transplanted organs) you have on these topics in the Back Fence Forum where there is open discussion.

Chimps do have us beat in that they can unlock and open their front door while using both arms and hands to hold their groceries.