unique occurance
| Posted On: 02/27/09 06:25:13 PM |
Age 58, MN |
I disagree with your premise. This is a very issolated case. Very few people would think a chimp is at all human, except perhaps the deluded woman who had raised the chimp. I'm sure you have seen people raise other animals and treat them like people.
I know you are just trying to make your case against the theory of evolution, but you are preaching to the choir. To the rest of us, it looks like a long stretch of logic and will only inspire ridicule of your position.
Click here to reply to this post
|
This has GOT to be a joke...
| Posted On: 02/27/09 09:13:58 AM |
Age 36, CANADA |
You do realize that every single biologist out there would tell you that the animal in question had evolved for different conditions than a person's household, right?
For examle, Jane Goodall:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090226/OPINION01/902260338/1008
Good grief. You people blame evolution on everything. How's about thinking just a little bit for once?
Click here to reply to this post
|
you're blaming the wrong people
| Posted On: 02/27/09 05:57:16 AM |
Age 44, CA |
It's obviously the fault of Christianity, since Christians falsely believe that their deity has given them dominion over all animals to do with them whatever they want. This woman was just doing what Christianity told her.
Click here to reply to this post
|
please read up on biology
| Posted On: 02/26/09 11:59:44 PM |
Age 41, CA |
"If humans and chimps are really not that different, then why not expect chimps to act civilly?"
Chimps are a highly aggressive species. This chimp acted exactly like biologists and Darwinists expect chimps to act. In addition, this chimp was on an anti-depressant also given to humans and which also makes human being homicidal.
And I don't expect humans to act "civilly" either. Just look at US murder rates. In fact, chimpanzee and human behavior, unfortunately, are very similar.
"Humans are moral beings; animals are not."
That morality doesn't seem to keep human beings, in particular Christians and Muslims, from murdering each other, even in large numbers.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Higher Power
| Posted On: 02/26/09 06:40:21 PM |
Age 40, UT |
I too feel sorry for the woman involved. However, wouldn't it be more correct to say that this was God's choice rather than Darwin's fault? Unless you're implying that Darwin is somehow superior to God in this instance - and I don't think that's your intention.
Click here to reply to this post
|
You're kidding right?
| Posted On: 02/26/09 06:20:37 PM |
Age 55, CA |
Foolishness has more to do with this than Darwin. Any animal trainer would have told this lady the dangers of having a pet that can bench press her without any effort. In fact, Darwin would have likely told her the same thing.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Missing the point
| Posted On: 02/26/09 04:56:42 PM |
Age 40, AUSTRALIA |
I'm sorry, but there is no such thing as "Darwinism". There is the theroy of natural selection which is proposed as a mechanism of evoltuion. It's neutral on the subject of how to treat animals: like all scientific theories it's an attempt to explain the workings of the natrual world. Astronomy, biology, physics... they are not ethcial systems. Creationists/ID proponenets are deeply confusted on this issue: it's explains the process, its *not* an ethical system.
Science recognises the close genetic relationship as indicative of common ancestry, nothing more.
Click here to reply to this post
|
Darwin does not make chimp lovers
| Posted On: 02/26/09 02:39:40 PM |
Age 32, MA |
"Darwinists take some responsibility when some people actually put their ideas into action?"
The notion that human/chimpanzee solidarity constitutes an example of the putting of Darwinian ideas, that is evolution from common ancestry via natural selection, into action is beyond patently absurd.
The fact that science has revealed that chimpanzees are our closet living relatives does indicate that scientists(Darwinsts) endorse the idea that this similarity suggests that humans and Chimpanzees are essentially the same. On the contrary, there are profound differences(differences that scientists do not over look - but these differences do not include a soul) amid the two primate species - some of which make chimpanzees potentially very dangerous. Therefore, one is not going to find to many scientists(Darwinists) who would endorse the idea that chimpanzees make good pets or surrogate children.
The behavior of those who do not hold this view regarding chimps, that is those who believe they make good pets or surrogate children, does necessarily follow from Darwinian worldview, and its not even germane if it does(its not as if Chimpanzee's turning own their Darwinian owners is massive problem in this world. And even if this was a problem, it would not undermine the scientific claims that lead to this behavior. It would just call for education.) For the similarities amid chimpanzees, both physical and psychological, and humans are obvious to anyone who has come into contact with a chimpanzee. Thus you do not need to be a Darwinian, or even be aware of the science, to believe that chimpanzees, because of their obvious anthropomorphic qualities, would make good pets, or even family members.
Click here to reply to this post
|
nutters!
| Posted On: 02/26/09 01:49:04 PM |
Age 36, NETHERLANDS |
Dear sir,
do you not see that it is utterly ridiculous (and not to mention very, very unsavoury)to hijack the assault on a silly woman who thinks that keeping a chimpanzee as a pet is a good idea, and then present this as ŽevidenceŽ that the theory of evolution is to blame? If the lady had been savaged by a dog, or a bull, would that also be evidence for same? Surely you must see the many flaws in your line of reasoning, even without taking a stand in the evolution vs fiction debate!
Click here to reply to this post
|
Read More Feedback
|
|
|
