How we as humans came to be

[littlebillie 10]

"My post was stating if we (humans) evolved from monkeys, how come monkeys still exist? Your tree anolgy was way off base & completely pointless. "

 

Actually, the first question - why are there still monkeys - was pointless, and I was hoping the parallel would be obvious.

 

Why are there still wild dogs when we have domesticated dogs, wild cattle for that matter, and goats and sheep and swine? why wouldn't they all still exist, assuming to extinction event or more successful species supplanting them?

 

The question, why are there still monkeys, doesn't make sense - perhaps if you explain why there shouldn't be, then I might understand the question.

 

Until then, it makes as much sense as forests still standing after we start making wooden ships... i.e., no connection at all!

[firstpusk 10]

"Merlyn and FirstPusk:

 

Which human race is genetically superior to the others?"

 

We are all brothers no matter the race. The differences between the races genetically are miniscule. It is a worthless measure and a pointless discussion that provides cover for closet racists.

 

[littlebillie 10]

"Which human race is genetically superior to the others?"

 

None. Whatever you choose as a yardstick for so-called "superiority" will likely display bias. are there differences? sure. are some of these differences adaptive. probably. do they make anyone superior? only in the eyes of those individuals who have no worth in their personal lives and pathetically need something to differentiate themselves...

[le Voyageur 72]

On page 4 of this thread I've already broached a warning about creationalism leading to eugenics which was ignored. However, it took you guys only 3 additional pages to start bringing it up....so now I'll digress a bit and add some additional elements to consider.

Lets begin with a general overview, and consider this, that if the design of man is examined he is revealed to be a composite of all previous creatures, environments and experiences. His body below the brow is a machine of animals and elemental cycles. He is rather a summation of all that came before him and everything he already knows. But man is also a new stage in the event of time. His newness or uniqueness is hidden in the brain. His lower, or vital brain including his rudimentary speech and thought is part of the summary and reflection of the past.

Thus to call a human a being is misleading, he is more a human becoming. Man exists in a twilight zone between a beast and a Buddha (or a Christ)for he is in a constant process, knowing that he "is", but not "who" he is.

In a beast, in an animal, essence comes before existence. Essence is the whole blueprint of a being partly programmed by the coding of the genes and possibly by fields which determine the collective form, habits and memory of a particular species. For an animal, essence heralds existence. The essential blueprint precedes the living organism. The complete program of the life form, its habit, lifestyle, tastes, its manner of reproduction and its manner of dying all come with the original package at birth. Our first homind ancestors roaming the savannahs three million years ago, carried their essential blueprint with them. They followed the strict regime of their inbuilt genetic program which cast them as clever but simple beasts.

Let us suppose that somewhere along that long homind line a critical threshold appeared and the line split in two. The beast took the terminal path to extinction and the first true man stepped across the biological barrier which was to profoundly alter the evolutionary process. For now man existed first and his whole program followed. The beast had remained a closed being, pre-programmed, dependent upon biological evolution for any change. The new being, however, was suddenly an uncetainty - a becoming. Homo sapiens remains the question mark, a movement towards a quest of who he is. In biological terms this situation is created by the vast areas of the cerebral cortex which remain uncommitted. In most animals virtually the whole brain is taken up by particular sense or survival functions, but in man there are large unused areas which are available for other processes, such as learning and thought.

The biblical story of the expulsion of Adam and Eve takes on a new and poignant significance. Both Adam and Eve lose their beast like innocence and yet pay for their new found self reflective consciousness by being perpetually uncertain of who they are and wheteher they will continue to be. As far as is known they become the first animals to recognize and be afraid of death.........

[le Voyageur 72]

...as to scienthic methodology is has been a necessary stage in the human development and a supremely valuable tool. It is only when it is mistaken for the truth, the only way of looking at reality or the basis for moral or spirtual values, that we manage to get ourselves snarled up. It is only one method of inquiry. It is a system to know "about" existence. It cannot "know" existence. If a person adopts any permanent attitude of a seperate and analytical observer then he acts in direct opposition to the prime evolutionary conditions of being human.

Collectively we seem in a chronic mood of doubt and repeated questioning. The questions never end. At the other end of the spectrum are the religious beliefs where only "answers" are given. These older popular religions, formulated in ages of childlike dependence, encounter the adolescent separatist abstractions of modern scientific materialism. The old religions of faith with their ready made answers, mostly created thousands of years ago, cannot withstand the scrutiny of our age of doubt. But our culture has somehow lost out on the deal and finds itself alone and bewildered......

 

Thus, I seem to feel that as a species we appear to be an essential part of an evolutionary process through time, and that consciousness is the true evolutionary enviroment of man..however, to underline a simple fact, we neither know what consciousness actually is, nor do we have any way of observing its nature objectively. We appear to have it, and yet we don't know what it is.

But, of the different levels of consciousness, primal consciousness is the ultimate mystery, unbounded and unlimited by any experiential or conceptual phenomena. It existed before and will exist after any sense of "I". It is the ground of reality, the holo-cosmos itself, and the awakened consciousness of man in his natural state.....

[ScoutParent 10]

My original question:

 

"Merlyn and FirstPusk:

 

Which human race is genetically superior to the others?"

 

 

Firstpusk's answer

 

"We are all brothers no matter the race. The differences between the races genetically are miniscule. It is a worthless measure and a pointless discussion that provides cover for closet racists."

 

What scientic basis do you have for believing you are my brother? The differences between the races genetically are miniscule....there are at least 60 differences...what scientific measurement is miniscule equivalent to? Otos a worthless measure and a pointless discussion that provides cover for closet racists...nothing could be further from the truth. There was no basis for that comment when I asked a question on the basis on genetics only.

[littlebillie 10]

"...on the basis on genetics only" there is NO 'better' or 'superior' - there is only different, and not even enough of that to separate us into species, or make any other qualitative distinction.

 

THAT is the call based on "genetics only". and of course, world travel, education abroad, e- and im-migration, international commerce, and so on are all commingling the genetic pool anyway!

 

one world, one people, eh?

[NJCubScouter 1389]

There are a few dozen issues discussed in this thread that I have not had a chance to comment on, but let me pick out just one for right now:

 

ScoutParent, I had the impression that you were one of the people in this forum who believe in the literal truth of the entire Bible. If that is not correct, I apologize for the error. If it is correct, however, I wonder what's up with all this stuff about race, are you my brother, etc. I'm fairly certain that if the Bible is literally true, we are all descended from Adam and Eve, and therefore we are all cousins. And therefore all of the same race. Right?

[firstpusk 10]

"What scientic basis do you have for believing you are my brother?"

 

We are members of the human race, the same species, same gene pool and same evolutionary history. Beyond that, I assume you are a scouter and share a belief in those values. If I am mistaken on either count, let me know the nature of my error.

 

"'The differences between the races genetically are miniscule....'there are at least 60 differences...what scientific measurement is miniscule equivalent to?"

 

I mean the variation within races is greater than the average difference between them. The notion of some difinitive racial superiority has been used to prop up many racist ideas and programs.

 

'...a worthless measure and a pointless discussion that provides cover for closet racists...'

 

This is my firm belief. I have been in too many discussions with people that start with that kind of statement that end up with them throwing out some pretty ugly racist ideas. If that is not where you are going, make it clear what you are trying to say.

 

"...nothing could be further from the truth. There was no basis for that comment when I asked a question on the basis on genetics only."

 

People have died as a result of such thinking. Whether you like it or not all humanity is in the same boat and you are there with us. We have to learn to work together. Race is a human construct and based on the most superficial understanding of that shared humanity. I have laid my cards on the table. Let's see where you are going.

[ScoutParent 10]

 

FirstPusk:

 

 

Read the following information from PUBMED 04/04/2002 :

 

 

"Genetic distance data indicate that Caucasoid and Mongoloid are closer to each other than to Negroid."..............." The extent of genetic differentiation between human races is not always correlated with the degree of morphologic differentiation. The genetic differentiation at protein loci seems to occur largely by mutation, genetic drift, and isolation, whereas morphologic characters are apparently subject to stronger natural selection than "average protein loci.""

 

http://www26.brinkster.com/archived/viewnews.asp?newsID=644573390484

 

My original question:

 

"Merlyn and FirstPusk:

 

Which human race is genetically superior to the others?"

 

 

Firstpusk's answer

 

"We are all brothers no matter the race. The differences between the races genetically are miniscule. It is a worthless measure and a pointless discussion that provides cover for closet racists."

 

 

Are these scientists "closet racists"?

 

 

 

 

[littlebillie 10]

'Are these scientists "closet racists"?'

 

Well, first, I wonder if any breed of dog is considered genetically "superior"? It's all canis familiaris (if I recall correctly), just like WE are all homo sapiens.

 

There is one species, with differences among individuals and populations; science would not see anything like superiority - only differences. And those differences are becoming less distinctive over time, as the historically isolated gene pools have now started intermingling.

 

SCIENCE SEES NOT SUPERIORITY, ONLY DIFFERENCES.

 

Why, does the Bible make a value call?

[firstpusk 10]

"Are these scientists "closet racists"?"

 

Nope. The article you quoted indicated they were comparing DNA base pairs and morphological charactaristics of individuals to determine how evolution works. Note that they mention mutation, genetic drift and isolation as well as natural selection. They are trying to measure which of these factors are more influential in the course of evolution.

 

Note also, that they do not mention that one race is superior to another although they did mention the degree of relatedness bettween races.

 

Morphological characteristics of one race or another may help them be better adapted to the specific environment in which they live. However, they do not make them "superior". Those that dwell on such ill-defined questions are often closet racists.

[littlebillie 10]

This observation is not aimed at anyone in the current thread, and no fingers are intentionally pointed.

 

'K, enough disclaimer! :-)

 

In my life, it's almost always the case that when race and creationism raised in the same conversation or other proximity, the same folks who decry science in favor of Bible-based creationism will then TURN TO SCIENCE to 'prove' that the races are meaningfully different, and that there is a single superior race.

 

Why, I don't know - 's just an observation...

[firstpusk 10]

"In my life, it's almost always the case that when race and creationism raised in the same conversation or other proximity, the same folks who decry science in favor of Bible-based creationism will then TURN TO SCIENCE to 'prove' that the races are meaningfully different, and that there is a single superior race.

 

Why, I don't know - 's just an observation..."

 

I have observed the same thing. I was told very directly why by a couple creationists. They believed that the separation of the races was biblical and science added weight to their prejudice. I think that explains my rather vehement responses to some of the questions about racial superiority.

[littlebillie 10]

Some of the world's Flood stories have the protagonist survivor getting to dry land and either finding other folks there already, or being joined by others later.

 

In the Bible, the world's pretty much re-populated by the sons of Noah - and if that doesn't make us brothers, then we're all cousins at the least with an ultimate common Grandmother and Grandfather. Of course, Noah and Mrs. Noah go all the way back to Adam and Eve - but today, that aside, per the Bible, we are all descendants of Noah. How can we NOT be one family? (Hmmm - and likely an inbred family at that! :-)