(March 15, 2010 at 3:47 am)AngelThMan Wrote: Another round? Fine, let's go.
tavarish Wrote:What the hell are you talking about? Cells ARE organisms.I never said they weren't. Cells are organisms, and within their structure they are considered species of cells and organisms. But they are not species of animals. You know this is what I mean, but are nitpicking. Plants are also species, but you know darn well that's not what I'm talking about.
tavarish Wrote:You ignore refutation after refutation...Nothing has been refuted. There's been a lot of tangent side arguments, but the topic has hardly been directly addressed, so how can anything be refuted? You have ignored many of my points as well. Sorry but I haven't found any of your arguments convincing. We're at an atheists' website, so of course you're going to find plenty of support for your ideas. But in the real world no one would deny we have dominion over animals. I'm not going to change my mind because you've decided to put out sci-fi dribble about organisms that can take us over.
tavarish Wrote:You want to stick to the subject?First of all, a lot of the traits you've provided are not quite unique, as a lot of these species can be divided into subspecies which have the same traits. Plus completely different species have similar or approaching traits. An example of this is the pronghorn antelope, which can run up to 61 mph. Wildebeests can run up to 50mph. No animal intelligence approaches human intelligence. Of course this is a point you'll probably ignore down the line, and then claim I ignore your points.
Why are cheetahs the only species, out of millions of species, that can run 60mph?
Why are narwhals the only species, out of millions of species, that have a tooth that is 10feet long?
Why are Yeti crabs the only species, out of millions of species, that have hair on their claws?
Why are thorny devils the only species, out of millions of species, that have the ability to absorb water through its skin as a primary source of nourishment?
But even if these traits were unique, they pale in comparison to human intelligence because they do not provide their species the ability to conquer the world, as humans have with their intelligence. This point is relevant to this discussion, and it's another point you have ignored. Oh yes, you've denied over and over that we have dominance.
tavarish Wrote:I'll give you a hint. It had everything to do with adaptations to their environment. It's the same reason we have "intelligence". A quick look at an evolutionary chart would clear some things up for you, methinks.Again, this doesn't explain how art, math and science are a result of adapting to our environment. Another point you've ignored.
I linked you to an article in which biologists and philosophers explain the development or art through evolutionary means. You ignored that example and went on your way.
I provided you lots of examples of intelligence in animals. (By the way, there are plenty of animals with ALL of the criteria I listed, humpback whales, dolphins, certain primates come to mind). You ignore them and went on your way.
I directly addressed your argument. If you haven't found my arguments convincing, I suggest you re-read the argument and analyze your own text and see where it fails.
You're repeatedly told that humans don't have ultimate dominance, using micro-organisms as an example, in addition to being shown that humans cannot survive in many environments that certain animals can. It is SOLELY dependent on the environment. Our progress on Earth was because of it. What you're proposing is AT BEST an argument from personal incredulity, saying "Because humans seem to be so much more intellectually advanced, it must have been by God". You weigh no other options and ignore the points that are shoved in your face.
You said cells and organisms (the same thing, by the way) aren't species, and I illustrated to you that they are. Perhaps you should word yourself a bit better.
Here's a definition of dominant:
1 a : commanding, controlling, or prevailing over all others <the dominant culture> b : very important, powerful, or successful <a dominant theme> <a dominant industry>
We have the capability to understand the world around us in a unique way, but in no way to we control or command all others. We cannot survive in environments in which certain forms of bacteria reside. We cannot survive in considerably hot, cold, or dry climates. We cannot survive deep underwater, where pressures are immense. We cannot survive at high altitudes, where air density is low. Other animals, suited for those environments, CAN.
We are perfectly suited for our environment. It's easy to see how you'd think we have dominion over it, in the same sense that a lion may regard himself to be the the top of the food chain and have no rival.