Clothing (evolution)

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

You're confused.

Yes, I am. When you asserted that something was not probable, I got the impression that you were talking about probability. Please explain how this is incorrect.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Your argument seems to be that since human beings are unique in some ways, we must not have evolved.

I've posited no such position.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

We are not the only intelligent species; we are only the most intelligent. There is a spectrum from E. coli to us. Whenever you have a spectrum, something is inevitably going to be on the end of it, and that happens to be us..

there seems to be an almost linear increase in intellegence of species (I'm assuming here) until you get to man and there seems to be a very large gap to the next species down the ladder. I'm looking for a plausible explanation.

Originally Posted by Autodidact

It may seem improbable that Bao Xishun is the only person to be 7' 9" tall, but it is extremely probable that someone will be.

There is a fairly even distribution from the shortest to the tallest.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Yes, I am. When you asserted that something was not probable, I got the impression that you were talking about probability. Please explain how this is incorrect.

You're still confused. You are mixing apples and oranges.

Again, this bunny trail should start with this statement:

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

It is not logical to suggest that just because we exist that the theories as to why we exist are true based only on our existance.

There is no mention of probability here

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

there seems to be an almost linear increase in intellegence of species (I'm assuming here) until you get to man and there seems to be a very large gap to the next species down the ladder. I'm looking for a plausible explanation.

I don't know that your assumption is correct. In fact, I don't even know whether any such comparison has been compiled.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

there seems to be an almost linear increase in intellegence of species (I'm assuming here) until you get to man and there seems to be a very large gap to the next species down the ladder. I'm looking for a plausible explanation.

I would like to know how you are measuring intelligence and where you see this perceived gap between other animals and humans. Most modern research seems to indicate that measuring intelligence in animals is not that easy.

[Jistyr]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

Good enough but moving would still have been a speedier solution than evolving.

Do you think they understood that it was warmer down South before they even knew how to put on clothes?

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

there seems to be an almost linear increase in intellegence of species (I'm assuming here) until you get to man and there seems to be a very large gap to the next species down the ladder. I'm looking for a plausible explanation.

The explanation is that things are not always as they seem. Other species may be much more intelligent than the human ego is willing to admit. (is that plausible?)

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Jistyr

Do you think they understood that it was warmer down South before they even knew how to put on clothes?

Obviously not.