Another question for evolutionists.

[Ganuvanx]

The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men. Going beyond physical evolution, there is emotional, intellectual evolution and the ability to discern right from wrong or good from evil. This higher brain function in humans must have occurred recently in the evolutionary timeline. If I were an evolutionist, I would put it at less than 100k years ago.
 
There are many creatures on this earth with larger brains than ours. Emotional/intellectual evolution apparently occurs rapidly if you buy into evolution. Based on how quickly we made the jump to these amazing intellectual abilities, other species must not be far off in making the same leap. The question is what species will the future humans on this planet be playing chess with? Chimps, whales maybe elephants?

[OzmO]

The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men. Going beyond physical evolution, there is emotional, intellectual evolution and the ability to discern right from wrong or good from evil. This higher brain function in humans must have occurred recently in the evolutionary timeline. If I were an evolutionist, I would put it at less than 100k years ago.
 
There are many creatures on this earth with larger brains than ours. Emotional/intellectual evolution apparently occurs rapidly if you buy into evolution. Based on how quickly we made the jump to these amazing intellectual abilities, other species must not be far off in making the same leap. The question is what species will the future humans on this planet be playing chess with? Chimps, whales maybe elephants?

Based on this post, i see you know very little about what you are talking about here.

One example:
If you were an evolutionist?   As if the mere fact of being "an evolutionist" qualifies a person to make a claim like that.

[Joel_A]

If I had wheels I'd be a wagon.

[tonymctones]

LOL like oz said its extremely clear that you dont/havent studied evolution...i applaud you for what seems like an attempt to perhaps understand it but perhaps a less condescending tone would carry a lot further.

First off modern homo sapiens have been around for about 250k yrs burial rituals have been associated and even further back then homo sapiens with neandertals. This is just something i will use as evidence of right and wrong as one could assume that even before these rituals there was right and wrong in some sense as these ppl were tribal and when living in a communal enviroment there are rules...i.e. right and wrong. The intentional burial of members and what seems to be burial rituals(burried with possesions in certain positions etc...) implies that these groups held some sense of afterlife and right and wrong...this is at least 150k yrs before your date of 100k

how did you come up with 100k anyways?

second there are a number of reasons why our species has developed into the way they are today with the amount of cognitive ability that far surpasses that of other species that we have split from. The amount of protein available played an enormous role in brain development(did you know neadertals actually had a bigger brain then we did?) the problem is that brain size does not necissarily correlate to intelligence.

3rd evolution can take longer when the enviroment is stable as it has been for a very very long time the pressure to evolve put on all the creatures on God's green earth is less in a stable enviroment.  

[Ganuvanx]

First off modern homo sapiens have been around for about 250k yrs burial rituals have been associated and even further back then homo sapiens with neandertals. This is just something i will use as evidence of right and wrong as one could assume that even before these rituals there was right and wrong in some sense as these ppl were tribal and when living in a communal enviroment there are rules...i.e. right and wrong. The intentional burial of members and what seems to be burial rituals(burried with possesions in certain positions etc...) implies that these groups held some sense of afterlife and right and wrong...this is at least 150k yrs before your date of 100k
how did you come up with 100k anyways?

Anthropologists agree with you. They often cite prehistoric burial rituals as a sign of an emerging human consciousness. But is a preoccupation with one's dead exclusively a human trait? New research shows that, when elephants are offered an array of objects and bones, they behave uniquely toward elephant skulls and ivory, suggesting the creatures may have a special affinity for their dead. Several documented instances have shown that elephants will linger, often in an agitated state around a dying or dead elephant, and there is anecdotal evidence that they will visit the bones of dead relatives. Does this mean elephants are close to making an evolutionary jump? The question is not unreasonable if you subscribe to the theory of evolution.

I highly doubt an apelike "Lucy" creature could comprehend the difference between good and evil. The evolution time line places these creatures at 2-3 million years ago. Logically, this puts the development of our higher brain function within the last million years and the ability to discern good from evil as very recent. As for our guesses, 100k or 350k years ago, in terms of evolution the difference is insignificant.

[tonymctones]

Anthropologists agree with you. They often cite prehistoric burial rituals as a sign of an emerging human consciousness. But is a preoccupation with one's dead exclusively a human trait? New research shows that, when elephants are offered an array of objects and bones, they behave uniquely toward elephant skulls and ivory, suggesting the creatures may have a special affinity for their dead. Several documented instances have shown that elephants will linger, often in an agitated state around a dying or dead elephant, and there is anecdotal evidence that they will visit the bones of dead relatives. Does this mean elephants are close to making an evolutionary jump? The question is not unreasonable if you subscribe to the theory of evolution.

I highly doubt an apelike "Lucy" creature could comprehend the difference between good and evil. The evolution time line places these creatures at 2-3 million years ago. Logically, this puts the development of our higher brain function within the last million years and the ability to discern good from evil as very recent. As for our guesses, 100k or 350k years ago, in terms of evolution the difference is insignificant.

please give us a reference to your examples...an elephant reacting to ivory while it could be significant it could also be simply the elephant recognizing the tusks. what humans do is more then a mere preoccupation with ones dead, the elaborate ceremonies etc...lend themselves to their beliefs why would you think it was different 250k yrs ago?
To answer your question, iono bro ive never studied elephants on an evolutionary basis. I will say that they are evolving just like we as humans are as far as a jump i would have to say probably not although again im no expert on elephants.

LOL good and evil have changed more times then you can count over the course of man kind. Whats good now was punishable by death not but a hundred years ago. My point is that good and bad are subjective to each society and to each individual as well. As i stated these species lived in groups and in communal living you do have rules. These rules may not be something you consider good or bad but to "lucy" or her kind breaking these rules was bad and following them was good so yes she more then likely did have a sense of good and bad.

again where did you get your 100k basis from?

why is it you think that modern day human fossils are not found to be as old as other fossils, if we were created as we are now wouldnt we find modern day human fossils as old as say neadertals, austrolapithicus, dinosaurs?

Do you think its possible to believe in God and evolution at the same time? if not, why?

[liberalismo]

The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men. Going beyond physical evolution, there is emotional, intellectual evolution and the ability to discern right from wrong or good from evil. This higher brain function in humans must have occurred recently in the evolutionary timeline. If I were an evolutionist, I would put it at less than 100k years ago.
 
There are many creatures on this earth with larger brains than ours. Emotional/intellectual evolution apparently occurs rapidly if you buy into evolution. Based on how quickly we made the jump to these amazing intellectual abilities, other species must not be far off in making the same leap. The question is what species will the future humans on this planet be playing chess with? Chimps, whales maybe elephants?

Various mental abilities to discern moral from immoral came when we first started living in groups, probably a few million years ago. Even other ape species have similar abilities, especially chimps and gorillas. They all have hierarchy structures in their groups and all exhibit behavior suggesting the ability to determine what is right and what is wrong. Usually, for them "wrong" means bad for the group. Same with humans too.



Other species becoming smarter all depends on natural selection. If the smarter individuals of those species have a better chance of reproducing then they will get smarter over time.
This really depends on who humans are selecting, since human breeding of these species is the most likely cause for this in the future.

Candidates?

Elephants
Chimps
Gorillas
Dogs
Cats
Dolphins


Of course, probably not chess. But likely some form of communication much higher than that which already occurs between these species and humans, anyway.

[liberalismo]

Anthropologists agree with you. They often cite prehistoric burial rituals as a sign of an emerging human consciousness. But is a preoccupation with one's dead exclusively a human trait? New research shows that, when elephants are offered an array of objects and bones, they behave uniquely toward elephant skulls and ivory, suggesting the creatures may have a special affinity for their dead. Several documented instances have shown that elephants will linger, often in an agitated state around a dying or dead elephant, and there is anecdotal evidence that they will visit the bones of dead relatives. Does this mean elephants are close to making an evolutionary jump? The question is not unreasonable if you subscribe to the theory of evolution.

I highly doubt an apelike "Lucy" creature could comprehend the difference between good and evil. The evolution time line places these creatures at 2-3 million years ago. Logically, this puts the development of our higher brain function within the last million years and the ability to discern good from evil as very recent. As for our guesses, 100k or 350k years ago, in terms of evolution the difference is insignificant.

To be fair, MOST higher animals and essentially all mammals are "conscious".

The difference we're discussing here is "human consciousness", which isn't really anything special. All of the human emotions and worldviews. I would like to feel how certain animals feel and view the world (while still keeping my same cognitive ability). Mostly an emotional difference I would imagine.

The special thing is human "cognitive ability". Different from basic consciousness.

My Dog is conscious, but he doesn't have high cognitive ability (compared to a human). He knows that he himself exists, he knows where he is and he knows what he wants, but that's about it. He gets sad, mad, happy, scared, surprised, etc. However he doesn't have powerful cognitive abilities to communicate or solve problems.
He can point to a bag of biscuits with his nose over and over to tell me that he wants a biscuit, though. Same with the door and when he has to go out to pee or poo.

Chimps are also very smart and aware of the world, they can solve problems, communicate complex things, express themselves, etc.

[ToxicAvenger]

The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men.

similarities that are clearly visible...

i've yet to see god 

actually there is more photo proof of UFOs than god

[liberalismo]

similarities that are clearly visible...

i've yet to see god 

actually there is more photo proof of UFOs than god

Humans look more like chimps and gorillas than any other species. This is because they are our cousins. Someone from another planet who came to earth and was confronted with a naked early hairy human and a chimpanzee or gorilla would find it difficult to differentiate them. But they could probably easily see the difference between a human and a frog or a human and a butterfly.

[tonymctones]

similarities that are clearly visible...

i've yet to see god 

actually there is more photo proof of UFOs than god

just depends on where you look and how you view things brother.

[Nordic Superman]

The evolutionist’s notion that man evolved by chance from ape-like creatures is largely based upon certain anatomical similarities between apes and men.

Before you ask another question, please actually understand evolution. The mechanism of evolution, natural selection is overwhelmingly NOT CHANCE.

What you're talking about is genetic level aspects of evolution where mutations may take place on genes... normally leading to certain death for the organism... but sometimes leading to better adaptation to the task at hand.