Scientific thinking and common sense

[Eloi]

I have noticed that sometimes people with a scientific mind, people who have studied a lot and know a lot of information about different sciences, do not notice simple things that do not escape the attention of ordinary people, even if they have studied less or almost nothing.

For example, the fact that the animals that evolutionists call "lower" in the evolutionary scale still live alongside humans, and that others supposedly fitter, because they are located in a higher position in the evolutionary line of man, no longer exist.

Evolutionary theory holds that as animals progressed up the evolutionary scale, they became more capable of surviving. Why, then, is the “inferior” ape family still in existence, but not a single one of the presumed intermediate forms, which were supposed to be more advanced in evolution? Today we see chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans, but no “ape-men.” Does it seem likely that every one of the more recent and supposedly more advanced “links” between apelike creatures and modern man should have become extinct, but not the lower apes? https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101985017

To what extent do you think the "wisdom" of this system of things can cloud a person's mind?

[Jose Fly]

the fact that the animals that evolutionists call "lower" in the evolutionary scale still live alongside humans, and that others supposedly fitter, because they are located in a higher position in the evolutionary line of man, no longer exist.

Please cite a scientific source that expresses this viewpoint.

[Difflugia]

the fact that the animals that evolutionists call "lower" in the evolutionary scale still live alongside humans, and that others supposedly fitter, because they are located in a higher position in the evolutionary line of man, no longer exist.

Please cite a scientific source that expresses this viewpoint.

Or even someone that's just not a creationist. Even Answers in Genesis, the reigning monarch of bad arguments, knows this is a bad argument.

Many creationists today, sadly, demonstrate their lack of understanding of the evolutionists’ position when they ask this question.

[Miles]

I have noticed that sometimes people with a scientific mind, people who have studied a lot and know a lot of information about different sciences, do not notice simple things that do not escape the attention of ordinary people, even if they have studied less or almost nothing.

For example, the fact that the animals that evolutionists call "lower" in the evolutionary scale still live alongside humans, and that others supposedly fitter, because they are located in a higher position in the evolutionary line of man, no longer exist.

If you're talking about scientists who accept evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of species on Earth, then I would be surprised at such a comment IF they're using "lower" to mean anything other than "previous"; however, if you're talking about a lay person who also accepts evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of species on Earth, then I can see it as a mere misunderstanding or slip of speech, as happens with many lay understandings of scientific issues.

Evolutionary theory holds that as animals progressed up the evolutionary scale, they became more capable of surviving. Why, then, is the “inferior” ape family still in existence, but not a single one of the presumed intermediate forms, which were supposed to be more advanced in evolution? Today we see chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans, but no “ape-men.” Does it seem likely that every one of the more recent and supposedly more advanced “links” between apelike creatures and modern man should have become extinct, but not the lower apes?[/i] https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101985017

Noting that you plucked this from a Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society web site I wouldn't put much trust into anything it says about scientific issues, no matter what it may be. The Society gets quite a few things wrong---by mistake and on purpose---including the notion that there's such a thing as an evolutionary scale that animals progress up.

To what extent do you think the "wisdom" of this system of things can cloud a person's mind?

Don't know what "system" you have in mind, but in as much as I don't see any "wisdom" here at all I suppose what is said could easily "cloud" a gullible person's mind. It happens all the time, particularly when involving religious issues.


.

[Eloi]

Talking about "a gullible person's mind" ... evolutionists believed the Piltdown Man was something real FOR 50 YEARS ...

As I said: a lot of people don't see the obvious, even if they think they are "wiser" than most people ...

1) evolution holds than only survive fitter animals
2) there are chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans today
3) there are not any HOMO-blah today
4) HOMOs were not any evolutionary better than any chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans ... that's why no HOMO exist today ... or never did.

[Jose Fly]

Talking about "a gullible person's mind" ... evolutionists believed the Piltdown Man was something real FOR 50 YEARS ...

Ya wanna take a look at the Jehovah's Witnesses' history with end times predictions and other issues? Probably not, huh?

As I said: a lot of people don't see the obvious, even if they think they are "wiser" than most people ...

1) evolution holds than only survive fitter animals
2) there are chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans today
3) there are not any HOMO-blah today
4) HOMOs were not any evolutionary better than any chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans ... that's why no HOMO exist today ... or never did.

Wow.....all I can say to that is....wow.

I really just don't get some folks.

[Miles]

Talking about "a gullible person's mind" ... evolutionists believe the Piltdown Man was something real FOR 50 YEARS ...

Err . . . . . 1953 -1912 is 41 years, NOT 50 years. Perhaps this will help.

Click on the SUBTRACTION APP

And FOR 1,989 YEARS (that's 2022-33 ) Christians have believed Jesus was resurrected.

As I said: a lot of people don't see the obvious, even if they think they are "wiser" than most people ...

And as I said; 1953 - 1912 = 41 (1953 was the year the Piltdown man hoax was definitively demonstrated. AND 1912 was the year Charles Dawson claimed that he had discovered the "missing link" between ape and man: the Piltdown Man.)


.

[Tcg]

Talking about "a gullible person's mind" ... evolutionists believe the Piltdown Man was something real FOR 50 YEARS ...

Err . . . . . 1953 -1912 is 41 years, NOT 50 years. Perhaps this will help.

As I said: a lot of people don't see the obvious, even if they think they are "wiser" than most people ...

And as I said; 1953 - 1912 = 41 (1953 was the year the Piltdown man hoax was definitively demonstrated. AND 1912 was the year Charles Dawson claimed that he had discovered the "missing link" between ape and man: the Piltdown Man.)


.

Let's also not forget that numerous scientists saw the obvious:

As early as 1913, David Waterston of King's College London published in Nature his conclusion that the sample consisted of an ape mandible and human skull. Likewise, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule concluded the same thing in 1915. A third opinion from the American zoologist Gerrit Smith Miller concluded that Piltdown's jaw came from a fossil ape. In 1923, Franz Weidenreich examined the remains and correctly reported that they consisted of a modern human cranium and an orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_ ... ly%20human.

Tcg

[Miles]

Talking about "a gullible person's mind" ... evolutionists believe the Piltdown Man was something real FOR 50 YEARS ...

Err . . . . . 1953 -1912 is 41 years, NOT 50 years. Perhaps this will help.

As I said: a lot of people don't see the obvious, even if they think they are "wiser" than most people ...

And as I said; 1953 - 1912 = 41 (1953 was the year the Piltdown man hoax was definitively demonstrated. AND 1912 was the year Charles Dawson claimed that he had discovered the "missing link" between ape and man: the Piltdown Man.)


.

Let's also not forget that numerous scientists saw the obvious:

As early as 1913, David Waterston of King's College London published in Nature his conclusion that the sample consisted of an ape mandible and human skull. Likewise, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule concluded the same thing in 1915. A third opinion from the American zoologist Gerrit Smith Miller concluded that Piltdown's jaw came from a fossil ape. In 1923, Franz Weidenreich examined the remains and correctly reported that they consisted of a modern human cranium and an orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_ ... ly%20human.

Absolutely. By no means did all of science consider the Piltdown Man to be a valid Hominid fossil. And when it was shown to be a fraud, science dropped it like a hot potato, unlike other disciplines that will ignore findings of fact in favor of holding onto cherished beliefs.

.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Eloi in post #1]

Evolutionary theory holds that as animals progressed up the evolutionary scale, they became more capable of surviving. Why, then, is the “inferior” ape family still in existence, but not a single one of the presumed intermediate forms, which were supposed to be more advanced in evolution? Today we see chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans, but no “ape-men.” Does it seem likely that every one of the more recent and supposedly more advanced “links” between apelike creatures and modern man should have become extinct, but not the lower apes?

If this is the kind of stuff the JW brothers who supposedly study the science are feeding down to their members who don't, it is no surprise that the rank and file view evolution as they do. They are grossly misinformed as to how it actually does work. Why are there no more dodo birds, or woolly mammoths (or 99%+ of all animals that did once exist), yet we still have all kinds of other birds and elephants? Why do anti-evolutionists constantly ask the question "if humans evolved from apes, why are there still apes?" To paraphrase an old saying, it is better to remain silent and be thought ignorant of how evolution works, than to speak up and remove all doubt. The JW brothers need to update their understanding of the subject in a big way.

To what extent do you think the "wisdom" of this system of things can cloud a person's mind?

It is no different from any other area of science. Observations are made, and explanations are sought to try and explain them. This is how the Theory of Evolution reached the level of a formal scientific theory. The evidence that supports it is overwhelming, while the arguments against it have so far all failed to show that it isn't valid. Clear misunderstanding of how it works as demonstrated (in spades) in the JW article quote above don't help because the science community can clearly see that it is purely an attempt to discredit the theory for religious reasons, not science reasons, and rightfully ignore it.