Why modern non-human apes can't develop large brain now?

  • Thread starter Thread starter abcdefg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
abcdefg:
and human try to create species called dumb dog?
Click to expand...
I dont understand what youre saying? Animals (at least not usually) dont REGRESS in evolution. Theyre not getting dumber, theyre simply not further evolving. Not getting smarter, staying the same. People arent TRYING to do this, but its an affect of domestication. They dont wanna wait around a few million years for an animal to smarten up, they want to use the animal’s talents to their advantage now. Dogs are particularly useful to people, so we take them in. Do you think police dogs that have shown elevated intelligence are being bred? They cant be distracted by those type of urgres. Most dogs now are neutered before they reproduce. We’re stemming the natural reproduction process. Also, the weaker or less intelligent dogs arent dying out because of their inability to fend for themselves because people are feeding them, walking them, doing everything for them. Dogs like chihuahus were created by people as a dog that really couldnt survive in the real world due to size, and pugs have extreme health problems from their squished face. Other dogs would die because theyre predisposed to hip dysplasia. People created these breeds, and in the wild they would eventually die out, but in captivity we pay for their hip repalcement surgeries and find them their food. What doesnt make sense about this?
 
to siamesecat:
do human want smarter dogs or dumber dogs?
Yes or No?
 
40.png
abcdefg:
to siamesecat:
do human want smarter dogs or dumber dogs?
Yes or No?
Click to expand...
Smarter. But to make them smarter, we’d most likely have to release them into the wild and let nature take its course. Unless scientists come up with some way to alter the brain, then of course it would be used.
 
40.png
abcdefg:
Then why neuter them? without reproduction no species can change.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Lol I dont understand what you’re trying to prove. I’m explaining why theyre not changing. No reproduction. You understand that so what else is there? The reason for neuturing is pretty obvious…people dont want their dogs to keep having puppies that they dont want. And as for like police dogs, if the dogs are always distracted by their urge to reproduce, they wont work as well. Theyre also more agressive unneutered.
 
40.png
siamesecat:
Exactly. Lol I dont understand what you’re trying to prove. I’m explaining why theyre not changing. No reproduction. You understand that so what else is there? The reason for neuturing is pretty obvious…people dont want their dogs to keep having puppies that they dont want. And as for like police dogs, if the dogs are always distracted by their urge to reproduce, they wont work as well. Theyre also more agressive unneutered.
Click to expand...
you are trying to prove to me humans want smart dogs, yet don’t want them to change by neuter them. logic escapes your brain today.
 
40.png
abcdefg:
you are trying to prove to me humans want smart dogs, yet don’t want them to change by neuter them. logic escapes your brain today.
Click to expand...
Logic escapes my brian? Ok, so scientists now understand that this is so. Do you expect them to therefore release all dogs in the wild and wait a few thousand years until they get smarter? This isnt an instantaneous or practical scenario. They would like smarter dogs, but if they were allowed to breed naturally now, it would still be ages before they made a significant mental advance, and scientists probably arent focused on making smarter dogs for future scientists, people are set on doing whats helpful to them NOW. I mean why is this a contradiction? Its not like scientists grab a few dogs and breed them to get a smarter one. theyd have to get massive amounts of dogs breeding over and over again and watching each puppy for higher intelligence. Is that practical or realistic? Of course theyre not going to do it. If they could easily make a smarter dog, Im certainly sure they would. The reason they neuter dogs is not because theyre like “lets keep dogs dumb” its because of practical reasons (people dont want their dogs having bunches of puppies and being agressive.)
 
I’m not forcing you to believe in evolution or anything, I’m just explaining what the theory is and how it would work. I dont see any conflict in my posts. Maybe I should rephrase it: If scientists want smarter dogs, please explain, in considerate detail, how they should going about doing it so as not to contradict themselves.
 
You said:

abcdefg said:
“they would certainly develop better brain if evolution were true.” that’s the point I’m trying to prove. or you can put it in another way “they would **have **developed better brain…” It’s the same. …

also given the long history evolution “theory” claims, apes have been given enough opportunity to develop large brains. but they simply wouldn’t develop.
Click to expand...

I have asked twice for your evidence for this contention. You have both times simply replied that -
40.png
abcdefg:
statistically mutations are not directional, some lead to larger brain, some lead to smaller brain, some lead to higher body heights, some lead to shorter body heights. if you think mutations are directional then you’re a lamarckist.
Click to expand...
or
40.png
abcdefg:
mutations don’t exclude the direction of “better brain” even now.
Click to expand...
Your answers do not prove your contention!

Apparently, you have no evidence.

Apparently reasoning is not a kind of evidence.

(The chopsticks are not working. I think I’ll go get a big glass … and lots of ice …)
 
zian said:
You said:

I have asked twice for your evidence for this contention. You have both times simply replied that -
or

Your answers do not prove your contention!

Apparently, you have no evidence.

Apparently reasoning is not a kind of evidence.

(The chopsticks are not working. I think I’ll go get a big glass … and lots of ice …)
Click to expand...

What evidence to you want? Darwin has made it quite clear.
you’re a Lamarckist
 
The question of this thread can also be asked using the method giraffe/wing threada slightly larger brain means the ability to remember more useless knowledge(for example a few more digits of pi in the case of human) which certainly has no impact on survival. thus natural selection can’t work
 
40.png
abcdefg:
Thanks for pointing this out. this just made my day.
Click to expand...
Glad I could help 😉
40.png
abcdefg:
Can you say the ability to repair damage isn’t evolved?
Click to expand...
Sure we have a processes to repair damaged DNA
What does this have to do with what you pass on to your offspring? :confused:

remember evolution isn’t about aquired traits so whatever damage you may or may not have been able to repair doesn’t matter beyond the point where it keeps you alive long enough to reproduce.
40.png
abcdefg:
it shows the advantage gained by a successful mutation doesn’t worth the risk getting a bad mutation.
Click to expand...
Are you equating “mutation” with damage an individual might receive say from radiation during his lifetime?

When we talk of mutation in evolution we are referring to a change that occurs when the reproductive cell is formed through meiosis or a copy error for example. The offspring formed will then have a slightly different DNA from the parents. This isn’t “damage”…from the offspring’s point of view that’s the way its genes have always been.
40.png
abcdefg:
the easier a species can mutate the faster it will extinct.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “extinct”? Obviously if a species evolves then the original species may no longer be around. That is not a failure of the species; the population is still going on from generation to generation and that is the only criteria for success in evolution.

If a species can’t mutate and thus respond to changing conditions then it may very well go extinct as in leave no successor species.
 
40.png
abcdefg:
The question of this thread can also be asked using the method giraffe/wing threada slightly larger brain means the ability to remember more useless knowledge(for example a few more digits of pi in the case of human) which certainly has no impact on survival. thus natural selection can’t work
Click to expand...
Is a bigger brain and a more developed brain the same thing? I dont know how our brain size c ompares to other animals, but our brains are much more developed. So maybe what I should say is the gorillas brain develops not grows, allowing for more things than just useless knowledge. (better problem solving skills, more of an ability to make tools) or something.
 
40.png
siamesecat:
Is a bigger brain and a more developed brain the same thing? I dont know how our brain size c ompares to other animals, but our brains are much more developed. So maybe what I should say is the gorillas brain develops not grows, allowing for more things than just useless knowledge. (better problem solving skills, more of an ability to make tools) or something.
Click to expand...
ability to make tools and problem solving skills are knowledge and can’t be passed to offsprings through reproduction.
 
40.png
GodnCountry:
ability to make tools and problem solving skills are knowledge and can’t be passed to offsprings through reproduction.
Click to expand...
Yes but the ability to figure out how to do these things is genetics. For example, chipmunks do not have the mental ability to make tools. They have offspring who also dont have the mental ability. Gorillas do. A baby gorilla isnt born knowing how to do it because its parents do, but if the parents pass on their intelligence, he can figure out how to do so on his own. Humans arent born knowing how to do anytihng, but we have the mental capacity to learn, passed on by our parents. Many other animals dont have the capacity to learn certain things.
 
40.png
siamesecat:
Yes but the ability to figure out how to do these things is genetics. For example, chipmunks do not have the mental ability to make tools. They have offspring who also dont have the mental ability. Gorillas do. A baby gorilla isnt born knowing how to do it because its parents do, but if the parents pass on their intelligence, he can figure out how to do so on his own. Humans arent born knowing how to do anytihng, but we have the mental capacity to learn, passed on by our parents. Many other animals dont have the capacity to learn certain things.
Click to expand...
You’re right
the gap of brain development between chimunks and gorillas is so large, that the “useless knowledge” includes the capability to make tools.
But gorilla’s brain isn’t developed from chimunks in one or two generations. In a gradual evolution, the capability to make tools is always considered by the brain to be the most useful.
 
Discussing with anti-Catholics can be quite boring. they tell their lie, you knock it down. moments later they bring it out elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I found this quote by abcdefg from another thread about why anti-Catholics bother to preach against Catholicism.forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=81367

Change one word and it applies perfectly to the quote author. Back at 'ya abcdefg!

“Discussing with anti-evolutionists can be quite boring. They tell their lie, you knock it down. Moments later they bring it out elsewhere.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top