Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Origin of man

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Poll Question: Man's origin
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
11 [28.95%]
14 [36.84%]
13 [34.21%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Greek Hoplite View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Jun-2006
Location: Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 161
  Quote Greek Hoplite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Origin of man
    Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 15:27
SmileTell your opinion.
My blog
http://mankap.blogspot.com/
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 15:38
Actually the current evolutionary theory does not believe we decent from monkeys (neither did Darwin, he statet we descent from Apes, not monkeys.) We have a common ancestor with apes, meaning that there once was a creature from which both the apes and the humans evolved.
 
As for me: God is a fairytale, an I do not believe in them. So, if he doesnt exist, he cannot have created. And if he would have existed, it would still be unlikely he would have created man.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 17:18
I voted for 'something else'. As Aelfigu said, according to current evolutionary theory monkeys and men have the same ancestors, which is not the same as saying humans descend from monkeys.
Back to Top
Scorpius View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 11-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 215
  Quote Scorpius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 17:55
As for me, God created/creates/ will create everything to nothing, nothing to everything in Earth/Universe including Apes Smile
 
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
  Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 18:32
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
Adalwolf View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1230
  Quote Adalwolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 18:39
Paul, that was completely uncalled for. Whether or not you agree with President Bush, love him, or hate him, insulting posts like that are not acceptable. I think the intent of your post was merely to insult and anger people.
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 19:00
I agree with Aelfgifu also.
 
lol And if you ask me, that picture of Bush is funny.LOL
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 22:38
Well firstly the 'God made man' and 'Monkeys are our ancestors' options are in no way mutally exclusive unless you have a particularly limitied omnipotent god.

Although I have never done much research on the creation of man, much preferring what man did afterwards, I would say that the aquatic ape theory is my favourite. Humans being a type of ape that is designed to live alongside rivers and coasts sounds logical to me.
Back to Top
Greek Hoplite View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Jun-2006
Location: Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 161
  Quote Greek Hoplite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 02:11
Ok if man and monkeys have the same ancestor then could someone explain me why humans have soul and the animals havent?
 

Writing in a journal of American Medicine, Dr. MacDougall told of one patient who was dying of tuberculosis. He wrote: "He lost weight slowly at the rate of one ounce per hour due to evaporation of moisture in respiration and evaporation of sweat. At the end of the three hours and forty minutes, he expired and suddenly coincident with death the beam end (of the scale) dropped with an audible stroke . . . "

 

He said the loss was about three-fourths of an ounce, or just over 21 grams.

 

MacDougall conducted similar tests during the deaths of other patients over the years and got similar results. He noted that the entire bed was weighed so that any loss of fluids from urine or the bowels at the moment of death would still be weighed because the material would remain on the bed.

 

The doctor even considered loss of left-over air in the lungs. To test the possible weight of air in the lungs, he said he and another person each got on the bed and strenuously inhaled and exhaled. Their efforts made no change on the scale.

 

As a further part of his experiments, Dr. MacDougall wrote that he tried the same experiment with 15 dogs. He said he had to drug the animals to keep them from struggling, which suggests that he also used drugs to kill them. He wrote that there was no change in the weight of the bodies of the dogs at the moment of their death.

 

The experiments suggest then, that the soul has substance and a measurable mass. It also suggests that humans have something that animals do not, and that it leaves the body at the moment we die



Edited by Greek Hoplite - 11-Sep-2006 at 02:31
My blog
http://mankap.blogspot.com/
Back to Top
Roadkill View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2006
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 106
  Quote Roadkill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 02:21
 -What made you assume that animals don't have souls? By the way, humans are animals as well.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Back to Top
Greek Hoplite View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Jun-2006
Location: Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 161
  Quote Greek Hoplite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 02:59
Originally posted by Aelfgifu

As for me: God is a fairytale, an I do not believe in them. So, if he doesnt exist, he cannot have created. And if he would have existed, it would still be unlikely he would have created man.
 
 

1. If the universe has a beginning, (and subsequently space-time has a beginning), things are quite simple. In this case, the universe would merely require an initial cause for its existence; something that would give it an existence, out of non-existence.

The characteristic of nothingness and non-existence is the complete absence of anything, even of a cause.

So, if the universe at some stage did not exist, we cannot but concede, that there exists a certain initial cause that is beyond time and space which brought the universe into existence. 


It is imperative that this initial cause is not confined to space and time; in other words, it has to be infinite, omnipresent and ever-present, therefore it must be without a beginning, uncreated and everlasting.

This initial, beginning-less, uncreated, infinite and everlasting cause, we call God.


2. If the universe is endless,
there are two possibilities:

a) It recycles itself, or

b) It is an expanding, super-universe, with possible infinite, subsidiary universes being born from it.

a) If our universe recycles itself, if it continuously expands and contracts, it would still require a cause behind its every expansion. In other words, if it contracts because of (existing) gravitational forces, then it would take a tremendous external force to make it overcome the pull of gravity on its immense mass, so that it can re-expand.  Thus, we must again resort to this initial cause that we called God. Anyway, this hypothesis has recently been proven wrong, given that recent surveys (2 April 2001) led to the conclusion that our universe is open; in other words, it will be forever expanding. This in turn signifies that it neither pulsates nor is recycled. Specifically, Michael Turner (astronomer of the University of Chicago) had stated in a scientific convention at NASAs central offices: For seventy long years, astronomers and cosmologists believed that, although the universe is expanding, its rate of expansion will, at some point in the distant future, slacken. The question is when? But now, after discovering the vast distance to the supernova star 1997ff, we proved that the universe not only continues to expand, but also, that its rate of expansion is steadily increasing instead of decreasing.

b) If, on the other hand, our universe is just a tiny bubble, of an expanding super-universe, it could, itself, comprise one of the infinite, continuously-born and vanishing universes of every type, where each one of them would have its cause in another ancestral universe, which could possibly become the cause for the existence of a newer universe.  In this kind of a universe, there are those who cannot see any reason for seeking another cause, beyond this super-universe; although, once again, in this scenario, there could exist the other cause: the one we called God.

Even so, the only thing achieved in this case is to make it even more complex, and the problem be shifted elsewhere. We would again require an answer to the question: What is the cause for the existence of this super-universe?

Even in a super-universe with no chronical beginning of its own, it is still compulsory to identify its beginning in respect to its existence - albeit each of its component-universes has its cause in one another!  Given that the component-universes are interconnected in the time-space continuum, the overall system can still be seen as ONE super-universe, where its own time-space and its own (subsidiary) chain of causes become its noose  And, naturally, its reason for existence will likewise have to be sought outside this lattice of (possibly infinite numbers) of universes.

We must therefore conclude that every single thing in the universe is subject to the laws of space and time and is subsequently alterable. Only the initial cause is not subject to any kind of law and is subsequently unalterable, and it remains unchanging, no matter how much time goes by.

The initial, creative cause itself is therefore uncreated because it is unalterable, while all of its derivatives are creations.

This initial cause, which is outside of time and space, is God; therefore, all other things that are subject to laws, are creations.

 

My blog
http://mankap.blogspot.com/
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 04:11
Oh please! Souls do not have mass!

The existance of God does not in anyway affect the existance of evolution. Just be perfectly happy with the knowledge that they both exist!
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 05:27
Ok if man and monkeys have the same ancestor then could someone explain me why humans have soul and the animals havent?
 
I do not believe in souls either.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Roadkill View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2006
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 106
  Quote Roadkill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 08:26
 -If you're thinking of a soul as an everlasting spirit then no, I don't believe in it either. However, if you think of the soul as the sum of your personality and conscience then I believe in it. What I object to is the statement posted by Greek Hoplite, he has not seen a leopard shattered by the death of it's offspring, the silent commemoration of elephants revisiting the bodies of long passed away relatives, the desperate call of a calf frantically trying to find it's mother.

 -And for additional information on the Dr. MacDougall experiment go here. I wish to know where you get your information from Greek Hoplite, it sounds as if you merely pick and choose what you like or that you get your information from less than credable sources.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 08:35
Originally posted by Adalwolf

Paul, that was completely uncalled for. Whether or not you agree with President Bush, love him, or hate him, insulting posts like that are not acceptable.
 
Why not?
 
 
I think the intent of your post was merely to insult and anger people.
 
I think Paul's intent was to make people laugh.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 08:39
 
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Well firstly the 'God made man' and 'Monkeys are our ancestors' options are in no way mutally exclusive unless you have a particularly limitied omnipotent god.

Although I have never done much research on the creation of man, much preferring what man did afterwards, I would say that the aquatic ape theory is my favourite. Humans being a type of ape that is designed to live alongside rivers and coasts sounds logical to me.
 
Yes, I always liked that one. Pity it doesn't seem to be very fashionable any more.
 
I'm with the 'other' on this. There seems to be no evidence whatsoever that God made man (which god, by the way?), and no evidence whatsoever that man is descended from monkeys (or monkeys from man). Though they must have a common ancestor somewhere, since they haven't been around forever.
 
 
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 08:43
 
Originally posted by Greek Hoplite

Ok if man and monkeys have the same ancestor then could someone explain me why humans have soul and the animals havent?
 
 
I can see no reason why that would be relevant at all, even if it is true.
 
I and my cousins have a common grandfather and grandmother. But I have green eyes and the others don't.
 
Maybe possession of a soul (or less controversially, being conscious) is simply a step in evolution.
 
(I'm not saying monkeys aren't conscious: think of bacteria and viruses, with whom we also have a common ancestry.)
 
Or, if you're religious about this, then simply suppose that at some point God decided to give man a soul, but not his cousins, as, I assume, you could say he gave me green eyes.)


Edited by gcle2003 - 11-Sep-2006 at 08:44
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 08:54
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Well firstly the 'God made man' and 'Monkeys are our ancestors' options are in no way mutally exclusive unless you have a particularly limitied omnipotent god.

Although I have never done much research on the creation of man, much preferring what man did afterwards, I would say that the aquatic ape theory is my favourite. Humans being a type of ape that is designed to live alongside rivers and coasts sounds logical to me.


Humans lived by the rivers not because they liked awquatic monkeys or enjoyed swimming their, but because rivers proovided fresh water along with means of communication. You really need to research this topic. Their was nothing like th aqautic apes.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
arsenka View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 27-Nov-2005
Location: Russian Federation
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 104
  Quote arsenka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 16:36
"Ok if man and monkeys have the same ancestor then could someone explain me why humans have soul and the animals havent?"

Interesting question.  How do you know this?
IMHO, the method of (...cough....cough...) "weighing" soul descripted above  doesn't sound ... mmm....convincing.
I always supposed that consciousness, or  soul, as you like, refers to the abstract, non-physical sphere, which can't be measured by kilogramms.
Otherwise, soul will be reduced to the honourable rank of twenty-first finger on human body.
BTW, I imagine vividly the rush of weighing souls in order to define whose soul is heavier(=better?)LOL

P.S.: I voted for "something else" - I doubt there might be definite answer.


Edited by arsenka - 11-Sep-2006 at 16:38
arsenka
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2006 at 19:35
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Oh please! Souls do not have mass!

The existance of God does not in anyway affect the existance of evolution. Just be perfectly happy with the knowledge that they both exist!

Actually, I agree with you that the existance/non-existance of God does not in any way effect the evolutionary theory. Heck, I do not see where the evolutionary theory really contradicts any modern day religions(even Christianity, depending on which Bible is followed). Honestly, it is going to be hard for science to come up with an answer to why and how we are here, but I definitely do not think religion will ever find a reasonable answer. Saying that "poof, a higher power(s) appeared out of nowhere" does not make religions correct. The only thing that we really know about the beginning is that something did happen, whether a huge nebula containing all life exploded, or a higher power created the earth. This may be the one question we as humans may never be able to get a conclusive answer to, but I hope we at least do not try to kid ourselves and believe in rubbish.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.