Evolution is Unscientific

Humans undoubted spoke before writing, but I don't see how the vocabulary could be extensive. When did "we" begin telling stories or transmitting family histories? And I mentioned some time in the past the role of deceptive speech, lying, deliberately and with intent...when did humans gain this "art?"
Just think about sign language for deaf and dumb. How fast they can convey their ideas just by gestures. Even if the Neanderthals had limited lyringial capability, I do not think that hindered them in communication. IMHO, primates always had the capability of deceptive signs and sounds to deliberately misguide their sort and others. It helped in survival.
 
Just think about sign language for deaf and dumb. How fast they can convey their ideas just by gestures. Even if the Neanderthals had limited lyringial capability, I do not think that hindered them in communication. IMHO, primates always had the capability of deceptive signs and sounds to deliberately misguide their sort and others. It helped in survival.

The problem is there isn't any evidence of that, and quite the opposite. What studies do exist indicate higher order mental functions...rational thought is required for deliberate deception. I've seen no indication of such in other apes.

I have seen a chimp hide "food" from others, knowing that if she didn't then others would strongarm her and take the food away. That is more like a lie of omission, not telling the "whole" truth. But that is not deliberate deception, of providing incorrect or inaccurate information to deliberately mislead, which is a very human thing that is done.
 
What is physical? Is electricity or radiation physical? Wave and particle. The boundary is not defined.
In 3 dimensions, or 4 dimensions?

wiki said:
In physics, the fundamental interactions or fundamental forces are the interactions that do not appear to be reducible to more basic interactions. There are four fundamental interactions known to exist:[1]


wiki said:
In physics, radiation is the emission or transmission of energy in the form of waves or particles through space or a material medium.[1][2] This includes:


wiki said:
Philosopher William of Ockham discussed action at a distance to explain magnetism and the ability of the Sun to heat the Earth's atmosphere without affecting the intervening space.[2]

Efforts to account for action at a distance in the theory of electromagnetism led to the development of the concept of a field which mediated interactions between currents and charges across empty space. According to field theory, we account for the Coulomb (electrostatic) interaction between charged particles through the fact that charges produce an electric field around themselves that can be felt by other charges as a force. Maxwell directly addressed the subject of action-at-a-distance in chapter 23 of his A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism in 1873.[3] He began by reviewing the explanation of Ampère's formula given by Gauss and Weber. On page 437 he indicates the physicists' disgust with action at a distance. In 1845 Gauss wrote to Weber desiring "action, not instantaneous, but propagated in time in a similar manner to that of light". This aspiration was developed by Maxwell with the theory of an electromagnetic field described by Maxwell's equations, which used the field to elegantly account for all electromagnetic interactions, now also including light (which, until then, had only been suspected as a related phenomenon). In Maxwell's theory, the field is its own physical entity, carrying momenta and energy across space, and action-at-a-distance is only the apparent effect of local interactions of charges with their surrounding field.

Electrodynamics was later described without fields (in Minkowski space) as the direct interaction of particles with lightlike separation vectors.[dubiousdiscuss] This resulted in the Fokker-Tetrode-Schwarzschild action integral. This kind of electrodynamic theory is often called "direct interaction" to distinguish it from field theories where action at a distance is mediated by a localized field (localized in the sense that its dynamics are determined by the nearby field parameters).[4] This description of electrodynamics, in contrast with Maxwell's theory, explains apparent action at a distance not by postulating a mediating entity (a field) but by appealing to the natural geometry of special relativity.

Direct interaction electrodynamics is explicitly symmetrical in time and avoids the infinite energy predicted in the field immediately surrounding point particles. Feynman and Wheeler have shown that it can account for radiation and radiative damping (which had been considered strong evidence for the independent existence of the field). However, various proofs, beginning with that of Dirac, have shown that direct interaction theories (under reasonable assumptions) do not admit Lagrangian or Hamiltonian formulations (these are the so-called No Interaction Theorems). Also significant is the measurement and theoretical description of the Lamb shift which strongly suggests that charged particles interact with their own field. Fields, because of these and other difficulties, have been elevated to the fundamental operators in Quantum Field Theory and Modern physics has thus largely abandoned direct interaction theory.
 
Last edited:
The problem is there isn't any evidence of that, and quite the opposite. What studies do exist indicate higher order mental functions...rational thought is required for deliberate deception. I've seen no indication of such in other apes.

I have seen a chimp hide "food" from others, knowing that if she didn't then others would strongarm her and take the food away. That is more like a lie of omission, not telling the "whole" truth. But that is not deliberate deception, of providing incorrect or inaccurate information to deliberately mislead, which is a very human thing that is done.
We know that Neanderthals put flowers and Red Ochre on the bodies of their dead. Even Homo erectus ergaster intentionlly collected Ochre dating back to 546–436 kya.

300px-Museo_de_la_Evolucion_Humana_Burgos_-_Tan_Tan_and_Berekhat_Ram_Pebbles.jpg
Replicas of the "Venus of Tan-Tan" (left) and "Venus of Berekhat Ram" (right)
Homo erectus ergaster
lossy-page1-290px-Gravierter_Knochen_Bilzingsleben.tif.jpg
400,000 to 350,000 years old incised elephant tibia from Bilzingsleben, Germany
Homo erectus heidelbergensis
 
We know that Neanderthals put flowers and Red Ochre on the bodies of their dead. Even Homo erectus ergaster intentionlly collected Ochre dating back to 546–436 kya.

300px-Museo_de_la_Evolucion_Humana_Burgos_-_Tan_Tan_and_Berekhat_Ram_Pebbles.jpg
Replicas of the "Venus of Tan-Tan" (left) and "Venus of Berekhat Ram" (right)
Homo erectus ergaster
lossy-page1-290px-Gravierter_Knochen_Bilzingsleben.tif.jpg
400,000 to 350,000 years old incised elephant tibia from Bilzingsleben, Germany
Homo erectus heidelbergensis
Yes, but I fail to understand how these relate to deliberate deception?
 
Another anomaly with human evolution is the larynx, which made speech as we know it even possible. I never heard a good scientific explanation for that one, either. I seem to recall the consensus some years back was that Neandertal had a larynx that was midway between human and "ape," that limited their vocal range, I seem to recall that idea was challenged but I never heard the outcome and haven't pursued it.
What man had the larynx? Was it developed before or after.frontal lobe.
 
Not really a question. Shamans would say 'Do this', 'Do that', and bring a fowl to satiate the God. It has been like that in all history. Our predecessors also belonged to Genus 'Homo'.

"It is unclear if H. erectus was anatomically capable of speech, though it is postulated they communicated using some proto-language.
Artificial lighting may have led to increased waking hours—modern humans have about a 16-hour waking period, whereas other apes are generally awake from only sunup to sundown—and these additional hours were probably used for socializing. Because of this, fire usage is probably also linked to the origin of language.
Meyer concluded that the respiratory muscles of all H. erectus (at least non-H. ergaster) would not have impeded vocalisation or speech production. (Turkana Boy)
Increasing brain size and cultural complexity in tandem with technological refinement, and the hypothesis that articulate Neanderthals and modern humans may have inherited speech capabilities from the last common ancestor, could possibly indicate that H. erectus used some proto-language and built the basic framework which fully fledged languages would eventually be built around. However, this ancestor may have instead been H. heidelbergensis, as a hyoid bone of a 530 kya H. heidelbergensis specimen from the Spanish Sima de los Huesos Cave is like that of modern humans, and another specimen from the same area shows an auditory capacity sensitive enough to pick up human speech."

"The SH humans had a modern humanlike hyoid bone (which supports the tongue), and middle ear bones capable of finely distinguishing frequencies within the range of normal human speech. Judging by dental striations, they seem to have been predominantly right-handed, and handedness is related to the lateralisation of brain function, typically associated with language processing in modern humans. So, it is postulated that this population was speaking with some early form of language. Nonetheless, these traits do not absolutely prove the existence of language and humanlike speech, and its presence so early in time despite such anatomical arguments has been primarily opposed by cognitive scientist Philip Lieberman."

So, perhaps the first speakers of human-like speech were Homo heidelbergensis and not Homo erectus argaster.
 
Last edited:
Humans undoubted spoke before writing, but I don't see how the vocabulary could be extensive. When did "we" begin telling stories or transmitting family histories? And I mentioned some time in the past the role of deceptive speech, lying, deliberately and with intent...when did humans gain this "art?"
A lot of things are hard to know pre-written history. Especially the answers to such specific questions that refer to someone's intent or state of mind
 
A lot of things are hard to know pre-written history. Especially the answers to such specific questions that refer to someone's intent or state of mind
I think a great deal can be inferred, particularly by inserting the larynx and hyoid bone into the skeletal evolution, and the epigenetic impact of the surroundings / nature. A lot can be inferred from the artistry, music (there's an ancient bone flute found among Neandertals dating music back quite far), tools/weapons, and deliberate burials.

I could even add the memory maximization among pre-literate and non-literate cultures. At least among Native Americans, oral histories were quite extensive, going back hundreds of years, and faithfully remembered from generation to generation.

All of the major cultures of the world, and their religions, have alphabets. Those cultures that still today do not have alphabets are subjugated by the literate cultures. But the non-literate cultures still thrive, and still retain excellent memories...and tend to live their ideals rather than argue about them.
 
Last edited:
Mathematically, how could evolution happen without God? 3.8 billion years ago, single cell life emerged. Organisms then had to increase incrementally in size to thousands, millions, billions and to trillions of cells. Supposing it took a million increases, to go from single cell life to a species like a dog with a trillion plus cells. Each of the million increases in the growth of that organism would be responsible on average, for producing and arranging a million plus new cells to reach a trillion.

How can millions or billions of new cells randomly become vertebrae, lungs, bones hearts and all the other body bits? The process starts 3.8 billion years ago from single cell life. Each and every increase in size has no goals. Cells don’t have to collaborate together to become teeth, jaws, stomach etc.

If this process was truly random, a million increases in size of a million cells at a time could only produce absolute chaos. Feel free to adjust any of the numbers, but it still needs a numerical path, from single cell to the thirty trillion cells in our bodies. Or the approximate thirty thousand trillion cells that make up a blue whale. We can understand the beauty of mathematics, we can test and verify our answers.

How could this happen without God?
 
Back
Top