How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

Spin-off from "Dialog on 'Creationists read this' "

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3241  Postby aban57 » May 23, 2019 11:23 am

Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Same thing happens when I walk past a house defended by pack of dogs. They get so worked up they start biting each other.



They can smell the rotten meat in your pants.


Pants ? I would have said brain.
User avatar
aban57
 
Posts: 6435
Age: 39
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3242  Postby Spearthrower » May 24, 2019 1:28 am

5 years ago, in a different thread, where you were already employing this 'atheist ideology' stick... I wrote this to you JJ.

Spearthrower @ "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

Are you genuinely proud of yourself at how little you've evolved in those 5 years? Still banging a drum against people you elect to spend so much time with.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3243  Postby Jayjay4547 » May 24, 2019 1:12 pm

Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Same thing happens when I walk past a house defended by pack of dogs. They get so worked up they start biting each other.

They can smell the rotten meat in your pants.

What? That doesn’t even make sense; it’s just a vicious personal slur. IMHO you and Thomas Eshuis are out of line.
Spearthrower wrote:5 years ago, in a different thread, where you were already employing this 'atheist ideology' stick... I wrote this to you JJ.

Spearthrower @ "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

Are you genuinely proud of yourself at how little you've evolved in those 5 years? Still banging a drum against people you elect to spend so much time with.


You point me to what YOU said 5 years ago. Read with your post above, all that shows is that in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.
User avatar
Jayjay4547
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Jonathan
Posts: 981
Male

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3244  Postby Cito di Pense » May 24, 2019 2:07 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.


Abusive of what? Of the fact that you've been playing the same one-note samba for five years?

Jayjay4547 wrote:it’s just a vicious personal slur.


What? You mean, similar to likening your audience to a pack of wild dogs? You're not just walking by the yard, JJ. You're walking by the yard playing a one-note samba on a dog-whistle. You came to an audience of non-believers with a one-note samba about "atheist ideology", as if to suggest there is harm being caused, but that harm is all in your head.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Ivar Poäng
Posts: 28113
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3245  Postby Spearthrower » May 24, 2019 2:55 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Same thing happens when I walk past a house defended by pack of dogs. They get so worked up they start biting each other.

They can smell the rotten meat in your pants.

What? That doesn’t even make sense; it’s just a vicious personal slur. IMHO you and Thomas Eshuis are out of line.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

JJ likens everyone to a pack of crazed dogs then has the gall to WHINE about personal slurs?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Edit: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Last edited by Spearthrower on May 24, 2019 3:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3246  Postby Spearthrower » May 24, 2019 2:57 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:You point me to what YOU said 5 years ago. Read with your post above, all that shows is that in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.



The JJ obfuscation drama continues apace.

Not one jot of evolution has occurred JJ - you are manically obsessed with hating people just because they don't genuflect to your dogma.

What a pointless waste of your time on this planet. Go and do something useful with your life.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3247  Postby Spearthrower » May 24, 2019 3:18 pm

:lol:

Anyway... now I've stopped laughing... :silenced: ... no, it's still funny :lol:

Ahhhh....

Jayjay4547 wrote:What? That doesn’t even make sense; it’s just a vicious personal slur.


How can it both not make sense AND be a vicious personal slur, JJ? Did you want to try one gambit and just go with that rather than trying mutually contradictory ones?

As for personal slur, well that must be in your mind, mustn't it?

Do tell what you think I meant.

Of course, I was factually taking the piss out of your cute little homily likening us all to crazed dogs rending each other... but it wasn't actually a slur, regardless of whatever obfuscatory drama you are seeking to contrive.

I will happily explain what I meant, but first I need to enjoy the spectacle of you engaging in semantic gymnastics trying to accuse me of a nonsensical slur.



Jayjay4547 wrote:IMHO you and Thomas Eshuis are out of line.


Aside from how you laughably can't even tell one poster from another, even after years of interacting with everyone, and even when their name's written clearly on each and every post (because we're the faceless, homogeneous atheist mass to you, aren't we JJ?)... what's even more amusing is the notion that your opinion of your opinions could ever be described as 'humble'! :lol:

You've spent years insisting other people listen to your poorly conceived, shoddily presented, thinly veiled prejudice being asserted as valid and worthwhile... YEARS JJ... YEARS!

You have forfeited the right ever to conceive of yourself as possessing humility.

And what line is this of which you speak? And who the fuck are you to be delineating anything? You have no self control and are motivated wholly by animus against an entire group of people.


Jayjay4547 wrote:
You point me to what YOU said 5 years ago.


Indeed I did and still do, and it is clear you have not grown a millimetre in all that time. How very sad. That's what happens with unhealthy obsessions: you stagnate, harping on about old grievances, replaying battles you lost long ago, listing all the black eyes you gave and feathers you acquired in your cap.


Jayjay4547 wrote:Read with your post above,...


Because I wouldn't have read a post I wrote, JJ? :)


Jayjay4547 wrote:... all that shows is that in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.


Tell me the one about how we're all crazed dogs rending each other as you stroll innocuously past again. That's an instant classic.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3248  Postby Spearthrower » May 24, 2019 3:25 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Cathcart

Cathcart nightly makes lists of "feathers in his cap" and "black eyes", often finding something in the former category is in fact in the latter one, considering all the possible ways in which his superiors could react to them. In his attempts to please nearly everyone, Cathcart discovers that all the other soldiers hate him. This perception lives largely in his mind, but it affects his relationships with the others and they soon begin to actually dislike and/or avoid him. His paranoia, matched only by his arrogance, worsens throughout the course of the novel.

The concept of Catch-22 is also represented in the character of Colonel Cathcart (whose name is an anagram for both "catch art" and "rat catch"), as he consists entirely of irreconcilable oppositions and maintains an illogical thought process that echoes that of the catch
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3249  Postby Thomas Eshuis » May 24, 2019 6:00 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Same thing happens when I walk past a house defended by pack of dogs. They get so worked up they start biting each other.

They can smell the rotten meat in your pants.

What? That doesn’t even make sense;

Your failure to understand the reference does not make it nonsense or out of line.

Jayjay4547 wrote: it’s just a vicious personal slur.

Says the person who compared forum members to a pack of rabid dogs which prompted the response he's crying about.
:rofl:

Jayjay4547 wrote: IMHO you and Thomas Eshuis are out of line.

For the umpteenth time JJ, pointing out that your statements contain factually incorrect and repeatedly corrected claims, ie lies, is neither personal nor a violation of the FUA.
For the umpteenth time, you're in no position to object as you continuously manufacture multiple slurs at atheists and others.


Jayjay4547 wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:5 years ago, in a different thread, where you were already employing this 'atheist ideology' stick... I wrote this to you JJ.

Spearthrower @ "New eye discovery further demolishes Dawkins"

Are you genuinely proud of yourself at how little you've evolved in those 5 years? Still banging a drum against people you elect to spend so much time with.


You point me to what YOU said 5 years ago. Read with your post above, all that shows is that in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.

See, the above is at best a demonstration of a failure of reading comprehension on your part, but more likely a desperate and transparently disingenuous accusation.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 29851
Age: 29
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3250  Postby Hermit » May 24, 2019 6:29 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.

Abusive of what? Of the fact that you've been playing the same one-note samba for five years?

Jayjay4547 wrote:it’s just a vicious personal slur.

What? You mean, similar to likening your audience to a pack of wild dogs? You're not just walking by the yard, JJ. You're walking by the yard playing a one-note samba on a dog-whistle. You came to an audience of non-believers with a one-note samba about "atheist ideology", as if to suggest there is harm being caused, but that harm is all in your head.

As is "atheist ideology". Other than as a figment of JJ's imagination, it does not exist.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2107
Age: 66
Male

Country: Australia
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3251  Postby Cito di Pense » May 24, 2019 7:04 pm

Hermit wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:in 5 years YOU evolved from impolite to abusive.

Abusive of what? Of the fact that you've been playing the same one-note samba for five years?

Jayjay4547 wrote:it’s just a vicious personal slur.

What? You mean, similar to likening your audience to a pack of wild dogs? You're not just walking by the yard, JJ. You're walking by the yard playing a one-note samba on a dog-whistle. You came to an audience of non-believers with a one-note samba about "atheist ideology", as if to suggest there is harm being caused, but that harm is all in your head.

As is "atheist ideology". Other than as a figment of JJ's imagination, it does not exist.


If JJ wanted to get into it, it might turn out that "atheist ideology" is "hostility to religion" such that anything less than genuflecting is "hostile". Does that encapsulate the argument? The rest of it consists of JJ's literary pretensions, and you're probably better-situated than I am to sort out where those pretensions are most evident. It would (as you know) be a waste of your time. It's not just JJ's obsession with the nominal subject matter - it's got literary pretension written all over it. Could it be that the façade is falling apart now, and all we're going to hear about for the duration is about wild dogs?
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Ivar Poäng
Posts: 28113
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3252  Postby Jayjay4547 » May 25, 2019 7:40 am

Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Same thing happens when I walk past a house defended by pack of dogs. They get so worked up they start biting each other.

They can smell the rotten meat in your pants.

What? That doesn’t even make sense; it’s just a vicious personal slur. IMHO you and Thomas Eshuis are out of line.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

JJ likens everyone to a pack of crazed dogs then has the gall to WHINE about personal slurs?


Well, ift would make no sense for dogs behind a gate to bite each other just because you walked past with "rotten meat in your pants". That was just a pointless vicious slur.

Most routes I walk my dogs daily, take me past one or two packs so they feature in my life. My Patsi, (an Africanis but black with a white blaze on her chest, like many others in the district) she rejoices in rushing up and down past the gate snarling. That's if I don't spot her in time as she veers to starboard. Robert tends to just defecate in front of them. Gosh you don't think I behave in any way like that? I should Hope Not!!!!.

Sometimes on my dog walks, an owner has left the gate open, and then the dogs might rush back and forth, pretending it is closed. At other times a dog might sneak out and come rushing after me, but taking care to make a noise before reaching me. Then I turn around in an instant and raise my left arm with my stick in it. (I'm left handed). That motion seems to be an instinctive reaction. And the dog breaks off the "attack" .

When I first came to this village 9 years ago I used to carry a knobkerrie as a stick, that could easily smash a dog's skull. But gradually I came to appreciate the bad social message and I now carry a stick that is basically a twig. But dogs still get the message. In fact if I don't have a stick I raise my arm in a gesture that works nearly as well. Except that when I do have a stick I also feel a real urge to donner that dog.

If I carried two sticks that would be interpreted as an unacceptable social message but it would also make me invulnerable to attack from one dog; with a stopper weapon in my "stopping" hand and a striking kerrie in my striking hand only a highly unsocialised dog with a very big owner would think of closing with me.

These seem to me to be ancient instincts and abilities inherited from ancestors several million years ago, and central to human origins, though unremarked in origin narratives infected by the atheist ideology.
User avatar
Jayjay4547
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Jonathan
Posts: 981
Male

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3253  Postby Spearthrower » May 25, 2019 9:29 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:
Well, ift would make no sense for dogs behind a gate to bite each other just because you walked past with "rotten meat in your pants". That was just a pointless vicious slur.


The rabbit was clearly put in the pocket, and I shan't be apologizing for pointing it out.

You're still talking about a 'pointless vicious slur' except you have to cite your own analogy likening everyone else to a pack of crazed dogs to do so...

Are you really so up your rectum that you think your 'pointless vicious slur' is just perfectly fine, but how DARE anyone else follow suit? :lol:

Again, though, you've just repeated the same inanity. Either a) it makes no sense or b) it's a slur. You can't have both, JJ - you're going to have to opt for one or the other obfuscatory gambit.

Of course, in reality it makes perfect sense... dogs will react to bad smells that are out of place, and if you wander around with rotten meat in your pocket, then you're going to attract the attention of said dogs.

As such, I was playing on your analogy. What you're doing here is the functional equivalent of toting around rotten meat secreted about your person although it's not hidden from anyone - dog or crazed atheist, then wondering why oh why you're attaining the reaction you get.

No slur remotely necessary, which is why my post wasn't a slur... plus it made perfect sense. Of course, you are just desperate to paint people in a bad light - it's all you've got left given how your wilful manipulative bullshit has failed to stick, so now as I explained to you 5 years ago - all you can do is take the reaction to your self-serving spiteful behavior to be evidence of the assertions you made which generated that very behavior. Good little martyr.


Jayjay4547 wrote:
Most routes I walk my dogs daily, take me past one or two packs so they feature in my life. My Patsi, (an Africanis but black with a white blaze on her chest, like many others in the district) she rejoices in rushing up and down past the gate snarling. That's if I don't spot her in time as she veers to starboard. Robert tends to just defecate in front of them. Gosh you don't think I behave in any way like that? I should Hope Not!!!!.

Sometimes on my dog walks, an owner has left the gate open, and then the dogs might rush back and forth, pretending it is closed. At other times a dog might sneak out and come rushing after me, but taking care to make a noise before reaching me. Then I turn around in an instant and raise my left arm with my stick in it. (I'm left handed). That motion seems to be an instinctive reaction. And the dog breaks off the "attack" .

When I first came to this village 9 years ago I used to carry a knobkerrie as a stick, that could easily smash a dog's skull. But gradually I came to appreciate the bad social message and I now carry a stick that is basically a twig. But dogs still get the message. In fact if I don't have a stick I raise my arm in a gesture that works nearly as well. Except that when I do have a stick I also feel a real urge to donner that dog.

If I carried two sticks that would be interpreted as an unacceptable social message but it would also make me invulnerable to attack from one dog; with a stopper weapon in my "stopping" hand and a striking kerrie in my striking hand only a highly unsocialised dog with a very big owner would think of closing with me.

These seem to me to be ancient instincts and abilities inherited from ancestors several million years ago, and central to human origins, though unremarked in origin narratives infected by the atheist ideology.



So basically you're going to double down on your petty little homily that's transparently about likening the people here to a pack of crazed dogs, add in some additional physically threatening components about the mighty JJ facing off against the analogous crazed dogs, and STILL piteously complaining about how poorly YOU are treated?

Can you say 'get over yourself' JJ? If so, feel free to do so.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3254  Postby Spearthrower » May 25, 2019 9:36 am

Incidentally, JJ - you could just carry your keys and jangle them ferociously at any predator potentially stalking you... that'd be sure to ward them off. Didn't you get that Creationist memo?
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3255  Postby Jayjay4547 » May 26, 2019 2:17 pm

Spearthrower wrote:Incidentally, JJ - you could just carry your keys and jangle them ferociously at any predator potentially stalking you... that'd be sure to ward them off. Didn't you get that Creationist memo?


Stripped of the animus, you are making out that nothing a human can do would ward off a predator. Apart from cheating by jumping into his Land Cruiser or shooting the critter. So really, you are talking about human ancestors before there were Land Cruisers; let’s say Australopithecus. In claiming that, you help to explain how it is that, nearly a century after these ancestors were first discovered, the most basic fact about them hasn’t been identified: that is, what KIND of an animal they were.

The canines of Australopithecus, compared with those of other primates are clear evidence that they were adapted into the defensive use of hand held weapons. The rest of their body plan supports that specialisation.

Your position assumes that the predators were optional; you can put them in to scoff at what I observed about the apparently instinctive human behaviour with sticks, and then you can take the predators away again, in considering that these ancestors did actually exist in Africa, a place fully stocked with all kinds of predators from the eagle that took the Taung child, to felids the size of lions. You imagine our ancestors like actors on a stage creating themselves.

But the reality was the opposite: the hominids were INSIDE a forcing environment. It squeezed hard and out popped a specialised hand weapon user, then Homo faber, then a talking primate.

Where atheist ideology comes in is that it conceives no creator, so that humans could not have been made by anything external; not the felids, and not Africa.
User avatar
Jayjay4547
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Jonathan
Posts: 981
Male

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3256  Postby Cito di Pense » May 26, 2019 2:52 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:
But the reality was the opposite: the hominids were INSIDE a forcing environment. It squeezed hard and out popped a specialised hand weapon user, then Homo faber, then a talking primate.


Nah. It wuz zat black monolith whut did it. I seen pichers of it.

That's pretty much the role played by the 'biome' in your little fairly tale. You seem to know nothing about shifts in local weather patterns that are driven no little way by exogenous processes (that is, even solar radiation or weather patterns halfway around the globe. These are connected to Africa by global atmospheric and ocean circulation) and do not figure in your biome story. There are also endogenous processes that originate in regions of the earth deep below the living rind known as the 'biome' in your tale. This rind looks from space like nothing so much as a vigorously growing bathtub ring rather than as a marvelous creative endeavor. Navel gazing won't get you to that perspective. Some of the groundwork for the rise of the mammals and primates happened 60 million years earlier than your story even dreams of beginning, but you could take it all the way back. So, carry on with your little masturbation fantasy -- it's at least good for a few laughs.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Ivar Poäng
Posts: 28113
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3257  Postby laklak » May 26, 2019 4:09 pm

Spearthrower wrote:Incidentally, JJ - you could just carry your keys and jangle them ferociously at any predator potentially stalking you... that'd be sure to ward them off. Didn't you get that Creationist memo?


One could view that as evolution in action, because that's how polar bears turned white. Useful adaptation for an arctic predator.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19257
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3258  Postby Spearthrower » May 26, 2019 9:18 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:
Stripped of the animus, you are making out that nothing a human can do would ward off a predator.


Where, ever, in the entire history of my life in this planet, have I ever even so much as remotely, abstractly, or loosely implied anything like this in the slightest?

I've personally warded off predators many times... albeit not from jangling my keys at them... so it's hardly something that is my position.

It's a position you just made up for me... but I don't own that position.


Jayjay4547 wrote:Apart from cheating by jumping into his Land Cruiser or shooting the critter. So really, you are talking about human ancestors before there were Land Cruisers; let’s say Australopithecus. In claiming that, you help to explain how it is that, nearly a century after these ancestors were first discovered, the most basic fact about them hasn’t been identified: that is, what KIND of an animal they were.


That's just untrue JJ - we know very well what kind of animal Australopithecines were, from anatomy to behavior to the ecology they inhabited. I don't know whether you know this or not - but that would be a rather different point to whether we as in collective humanity know it or not.

Of course, this has nothing to do with your preceding point, nor to do with any recent discussion. You are doing as I said; trying to re-fight long lost battles.


Jayjay4547 wrote:The canines of Australopithecus, compared with those of other primates are clear evidence that they were adapted into the defensive use of hand held weapons.


No, that's a faulty assumption you've tried to employ in the past, but it doesn't stand to reason or to comparative evidence.

As I've explained to you before, dental morphology is primarily to do with mastication - there's no point in arguing otherwise. As with bird beaks, dental morphology is consistent with the types of food eaten because consumption of food is a clear and vital selection pressure. On top of that, there is ample evidence from dental wear and the ecology of the relevant areas that australopithecines foraged for tubers, nuts, and cereal grains.

Where there is sexual dimorphism present in teeth anatomy, what it indicates is intra-specific competition, just as you can see with modern gorillas. Do modern gorillas employ hand-held weapons? No. Instead, gorillas live in groups and respond together to perceived threats, and very few things prey on adult gorillas - leopards might take an injured or young gorilla, but they don't try and fight a bunch of gorillas weighing nearly the same as them. No weapons necessary.

When do you see male gorillas baring their teeth and using them in combat scenarios? When they're fighting other male gorillas.

This is just direct observational evidence, JJ. Not some bizarre and contrived agenda.


Jayjay4547 wrote:The rest of their body plan supports that specialisation.


No it doesn't. Australopithecines are very diverse, so you can't generalize like that.


Jayjay4547 wrote:Your position assumes that the predators were optional;...


No, my position assumes that as with the majority of animals, consumption of food is a much more profound selective driver than predation, as is competition between males for access to mates.

There are plenty of comparable species today which don't exhibit the behaviors you claim in the absence of evidence for the australopithecines.


Jayjay4547 wrote:... you can put them in to scoff at what I observed about the apparently instinctive human behaviour with sticks,...


What 'instinctive' behavior with sticks, JJ? Is this about your story?

Your story was all about being shitty to people here, and now you're pretending it's some evidence for your position?

There's no 'instinctive behavior with sticks' JJ - there's cognitive behavior which is learned and developed. Children don't automatically pick up a stick or a rock when attacked by a dog, whereas you and other adults may do so because you're computing your best chances. It's not instinctive.


Jayjay4547 wrote:... and then you can take the predators away again,...


I don't need to take the predators away, whatever this is supposed to mean, I am just sufficiently familiar with primate behavior to make some general descriptions of behaviors as observed repeatedly in the wild.

Chimpanzees don't pick up sticks to stave off leopard attacks, but chimpanzees are very similar to some Australopithecines.

Gorillas don't pick up sticks to stave off leopard attacks, but gorillas are very similar to some Australopithecines.

So you don't have any supporting evidence from the fossil record (it contradicts your claim), and you don't have any evidence from comparable species directly observable today.

So on what do you base your assertions?

You seem to think that the ability to formulate a sentence lends validity to the resulting meaning. It doesn't. That's not science. Merely stating something tells us nothing useful. You need to show it via evidence.


Jayjay4547 wrote:... in considering that these ancestors did actually exist in Africa, a place fully stocked with all kinds of predators from the eagle that took the Taung child, to felids the size of lions. You imagine our ancestors like actors on a stage creating themselves.


The latter sentence is your bizarre formulation, and it's not something I agree with in any way shape or form. You don't allow people to own their own positions - you feel like you can just make up nonsense then project it onto others.

I don't imagine our ancestors created themselves - that's a nonsensical statement to me. I think our ancestors evolved just like all other animals, and the pressures they faced were a) to get sufficient nutrients b) to compete for access to mates c) to reproduce and raise offspring d) to avoid predation... in pretty much that order of importance. None of this entails 'creating themselves' - just surviving in the same way as fish, or otters, or wildebeest or any other animal.

So why don't you let ME formulate MY position? Why do you feel the need to tell me what I think? After all these years, you can't even get past this most elementary of stumbling blocks.


Jayjay4547 wrote:But the reality was the opposite:...


No, no, no, no, no - you don't get to assert 'reality'. You want to play that game, you cite evidence.


Jayjay4547 wrote:... the hominids were INSIDE a forcing environment.


I am sorry, but if you want to engage in a scientific topic, you don't get to make up idiosyncratic buzz words and expect others to adopt them. There's no such thing as a 'forcing environment'.


Jayjay4547 wrote:... It squeezed hard and out popped a specialised hand weapon user, then Homo faber, then a talking primate.


No, you're trying to have directed evolution just because you want to pretend that your fictional deity conducted it. That's the real agenda here.

You still don't understand how evolution works after all this time, and the reason for that is because you keep on talking instead of listening.


Jayjay4547 wrote:Where atheist ideology...


No such thing - it's a figment of your imagination.

Jayjay4547 wrote:... comes in is that it conceives no creator,


Science doesn't posit fairies, I'm afraid. When natural philosophy graduated to empirical science, it stopped postulating quantities of angels dancing on pin-heads, started observing what is manifestly there, sought to explain this only in terms of what is observable, and bob's your uncle... we've been in a scientific golden age of knowledge acquisition ever since. Positing creators offers no explanatory power, JJ - it's a fifth wheel. It doesn't matter if there is such a beastie or not; there's simply no reason to appeal to it unless your faith is more important than divining truth. That's why religious people can be scientists too - they just leave their beliefs at the door. That's why you can't do science JJ - because it's all about manufacturing space for your notional over-entity. That's philosophically and methodologically flawed, and it's why nothing you say will ever amount to anything of note.


Jayjay4547 wrote:so that humans could not have been made by anything external; not the felids, and not Africa.


It's not how anything on this planet was made, not least because species aren't made JJ - they evolve. They evolve under complex environmental scenarios, which include many elements of ecology, both internal and external to the species, a whole lot of random shit that happens from the occasional lucky find to an unfortunate rock falling on the head, plus a whole load of statistical allele shuffling, played out thousands, millions of times over generation after generation. It's not directed JJ. You want it to be, but it's just not. There was no guiding force nudging australopithecines to become sapiens in the distant future, there were just australopithecines doing their best to survive whatever their existence threw at them.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 23066
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3259  Postby laklak » May 27, 2019 2:40 pm

One could just as easily posit directed evolution by ancient astronauts. The History Channel has a lot of info on that topic. Actually, there is more evidence for ancient astronauts than for your God, JJ, lots of pyramids and carvings of spacemen.

Only if you're not blinkered my mainstream science, of course. Free your mind, man.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 19257
Age: 65
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#3260  Postby Cito di Pense » May 27, 2019 2:51 pm

laklak wrote:One could just as easily posit directed evolution by ancient astronauts.


#3256
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Ivar Poäng
Posts: 28113
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest