Do Bad Mutations Kill People?

[james bond]

Human beings are a type of animal. The distinction between humans and other animals isn’t any lack of aggressive violence (if anything, the opposite) but out level of self-awareness and consciousness.

If he was deemed less than human, there wouldn’t even need to be a trial. That isn’t how it works though and evolution has nothing to do with that.

We obviously don’t know in this specific case but in general terms such incidents can be a result of physical damage, psychological crisis, developmental problems or birth defect (often a combination of several inter-related elements). Only the latter two could be directly related to some kind of genetic mutation but that’s far from the only possible physiological cause. That wouldn’t make a person “more ape than human” any more than a genetic mutation which leads to blindness or missing limbs would.

Why do a concept have to apply in a specific situation to have purpose? Why does a concept need a purpose at all? Evolution just is (probably), like gravity, respiration or radioactivity.

Let me put on my atheist science cap. From what I've learned from evolution, it's bipedalism that distinguishes humans from apes. With that knowledge, having an AR-15 and being able to fire it while moving is an advantage to see and shoot one's target. It also is a great advantage when one knows ahead of time that other people won't have guns of their own in the area.

What it does not explain is this person's mind set. How can he just kill innocent people who are defenseless? Even mental illness does not cause a person to do that. We do not know what causes people to act irrationally in an extremely violent manner. Thus, I was asking is there an evolutionary cause for it. I would agree that creating an AR-15 is part of improving one's defenses, but to use it in such an egregious and violent manner against others does not make sense. No animal would do it (but I suppose someone can train an ape to fire the AR-15 to kill people). Yet, a human does it. I don't have an explanation for these events, so that's why I wonder if it is due to some flaw in the mechanism of evolution. That mutations aren't always beneficial. If it has to do with evolution, then there should be some physical cause and not psychological or psycho-social development. Even psychologists or other social scientists do not have an explanation.

 

[james bond]

Humans are animals. What is so hard to understand about this concept?

Let me help you:

"Animals are eukaryotic, multicellular organisms that form the biological kingdom Animalia. "

Let's see, are you eukaryotic? Every other human on the Earth is. Do you have more than one cell in your body? Every other human on the Earth does. Are you an organism? In other words are you alive? There may be some debate on this point. And do you belong to the biological kingdom of Animalia, At lest every other human on the face of this Earth belongs.

I'm ignoring you because you make no sense, just are full of ad hominem attacks and personal opinions and don't even understand the question. You can't even explain the difference between humans and animals. Creation science explains it via cranial capacity as I have discussed in the past. Atheist science explains it via bipedalism. Was that so hard for you to understand? Yes, you can't figure stuff out ha ha.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me put on my atheist science cap. From what I've learned from evolution, it's bipedalism that distinguishes humans from apes. With that knowledge, having an AR-15 and being able to fire it while moving is an advantage to see and shoot one's target. It also is a great advantage when one knows ahead of time that other people won't have guns of their own in the area.

What it does not explain is this person's mind set. How can he just kill innocent people who are defenseless? Even mental illness does not cause a person to do that. We do not know what causes people to act irrationally in an extremely violent manner. Thus, I was asking is there an evolutionary cause for it. I would agree that creating an AR-15 is part of improving one's defenses, but to use it in such an egregious and violent manner against others does not make sense. No animal would do it (but I suppose someone can train an ape to fire the AR-15 to kill people). Yet, a human does it. I don't have an explanation for these events, so that's why I wonder if it is due to some flaw in the mechanism of evolution. That mutations aren't always beneficial. If it has to do with evolution, then there should be some physical cause and not psychological or psycho-social development. Even psychologists or other social scientists do not have an explanation.

It appears that you put on a creationist thinking cap by mistake. Since humans are apes there is no way to "distinguishes humans from apes". We are merely bipedal apes. And after that point you went totally off the rails. Definitely a creationist thinking cap since creationists have a problem with logical thinking.

You are conflating evolution and morals. Since you do not understand evolution you are bound to make inane posts that only tell us that you have no clue. Why don't you try to learn about the idea that you hate so much? You can't refute that which you do not understand.

 

[james bond]

Certainly. Read HERE. Essentially pages 251-257.

.

Thanks, but I use evolution.berkeley.edu. Maybe you should give the link to some internet atheists on this thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm ignoring you because you make no sense, just are full of ad hominem attacks and personal opinions and don't even understand the question. You can't even explain the difference between humans and animals. Creation science explains it via cranial capacity as I have discussed in the past. Atheist science explains it via bipedalism. Was that so hard for you to understand? Yes, you can't figure stuff out ha ha.

I have not made ad hominem attacks against you. I have simply pointed out your rather ignorant errors. By the way, as a Christian you just bore false witness against your neighbor.

Once again, no matter how many times humans are animals. Your demand is akin to telling someone to tell them the difference between German Shepherds and dogs. Germans Shepherds are dogs, you can't tell, just as human beings are animals. Now if you asked the question properly you would get answers that you might like. The problem is that you can't ask proper questions.

And by your standards all science is "atheist science". None of the scientific laws that you know of invoke a god. Gravity does not rely on a god. Conservation of momentum does not have a god stepping in and keeping the books. Evolution does not rely on a god for the small changes that add up over the years. Please give us a valid example of science that is not "atheistic" in that sense.

 

[james bond]

It appears that you put on a creationist thinking cap by mistake. Since humans are apes there is no way to "distinguishes humans from apes". We are merely bipedal apes. And after that point you went totally off the rails. Definitely a creationist thinking cap since creationists have a problem with logical thinking.

You are conflating evolution and morals. Since you do not understand evolution you are bound to make inane posts that only tell us that you have no clue. Why don't you try to learn about the idea that you hate so much? You can't refute that which you do not understand.

Wrong again. If it has to do with evolution, then there should be a physical cause. We treat this person as a human because he is bipedal. He is under suicide watch. Yet, he didn't provide the same type of consideration when mowing down innocent people. If it was a cougar that attacked and killed people, then it would be shot and killed. Could this person be treated just as an animal and be shot and killed or euthanized?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm glad you state mutations continue to happen which is the basis for my questions. To cut to the chase, we know how to distinguish humans from animals. How do we distinguish a mutation from a human or another animal? I picked Cruz because he just happens to be all over the news.

1) As I mentioned, humans are animals
2) People can have mutations. These can be benign, harmful, or (occasionally) beneficial. People themselves are not mutations.

In summary, Cruz IS an animal, but then, so is everyone else. Dehumanizing him is a somewhat natural reaction, but sadly unjustified. He's a human.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks, but I use evolution.berkeley.edu. Maybe you should give the link to some internet atheists on this thread.

No, you simply misunderstand evolution.berkely.edu. You can't even ask proper questions. A proper question does not have an assumption buried in it. For example you would probably not appreciate someone asking you seriously "Have you quit beating your wife yet?" That question assumes that you are beating your wife. Most of your questions have that sort of false assumption in them. Try to ask questions without such assumptions.

 

[james bond]

I have not made ad hominem attacks against you. I have simply pointed out your rather ignorant errors. By the way, as a Christian you just bore false witness against your neighbor.

Once again, no matter how many times humans are animals. Your demand is akin to telling someone to tell them the difference between German Shepherds and dogs. Germans Shepherds are dogs, you can't tell, just as human beings are animals. Now if you asked the question properly you would get answers that you might like. The problem is that you can't ask proper questions.

And by your standards all science is "atheist science". None of the scientific laws that you know of invoke a god. Gravity does not rely on a god. Conservation of momentum does not have a god stepping in and keeping the books. Evolution does not rely on a god for the small changes that add up over the years. Please give us a valid example of science that is not "atheistic" in that sense.

I give up. It's too hard for you to discuss in a rational and adult-like manner. I'll go back to ignoring your peanut gallery attacks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wrong again. If it has to do with evolution, then there should be a physical cause. We treat this person as a human because he is bipedal. He is under suicide watch. Yet, he didn't provide the same type of consideration when mowing down innocent people. If it was a cougar that attacked and killed people, then it would be shot and killed. Could this person be treated just as an animal and be shot and killed or euthanized?

It does not have to do with evolution. Your argument falls apart with that simple fact.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I give up. It's too hard for you to discuss in a rational and adult-like manner. I'll go back to ignoring your peanut gallery attacks.

More false claims. You are simply admitting that you cannot debate with me since I have been more than reasonable in dealing with your immature nonsense. Once again as a Christian if you make claims against others, as you have against me, that you cannot justify you are by definition bearing false witness. Why do you think that the Ten Commandments do not apply when you are dealing with non-Christians?

 

[james bond]

1) As I mentioned, humans are animals
2) People can have mutations. These can be benign, harmful, or (occasionally) beneficial. People themselves are not mutations.

In summary, Cruz IS an animal, but then, so is everyone else. Dehumanizing him is a somewhat natural reaction, but sadly unjustified. He's a human.

Yes, we treat him as human. However, he has some mutation which I was asking. If we can isolate the cause (assuming it's physical), then his type of behavior and thinking can be treated or removed. Wouldn't you think the cause would be genetic if he had a mutation?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes, we treat him as human. However, he has some mutation which I was asking. If we can isolate the cause (assuming it's physical), then his type of behavior and thinking can be treated or removed. Wouldn't you think the cause would be genetic if he had a mutation?

How we treat him (or what treating someone as human really means) is beside the point.
I have no idea if he has a mutation, but for clarification, have included a picture of a mutated human.

Spoiler

She has a mutation known as heterochromia. It can be congenital, or can develop through the course of a person's life, but either way, it has absolutely nothing to do with gun laws, mental health, or Cruz.

 

[Skwim]

Let me put on my atheist science cap. From what I've learned from evolution, it's bipedalism that distinguishes humans from apes.

Then you haven't learned much at all.


In a nutshell: In science, the word "ape" denotes all animals belonging to the primate Superfamily Hominoidea.

Here one can see that Gibbons are apes, (lesser apes), the orangutans are apes (great apes), Gorillas are apes (also great apes), Chimpanzees are apes (also great apes), and humans are apes (also great apes).

​

Now, what distinguishes human apes from our closest ape relative the chimps, or, why aren't we considered chimps, comes down to, among other things,

Skull shape and capacity

​

And DNA (Too many differences)

​

But more importantly, why are we considered to be apes at all? Principally its because we share a lot in common, such as very similar, although different DNA; erect posture and bipedal locomotion; high manual dexterity and heavy tool use compared to other animals; and a general trend toward larger, and more complex brains and societies. Furthermore, as one traces the evolution of humans back in time their physical characteristics, mainly skull features, begin to resemble those of the other apes more and more.

​

Whether or not you agree these characteristics warrant the inclusion of humans in the tribe Hominini along with the chimps, or in the subfamily Homininae with the gorillas, is immaterial. Scientists do, and it's why we who go along with science consider humans to be apes.

Now, if you want to continue to contend that humans aren't apes because of the word's unsavory connotations, or that in doing so it reinforces the evolutionary progress Homo sapiens have undergone, Fine. Your choice obviously, but at least you've been made aware of why we non-creationists contend humans are apes. From here on out you have no reason to complain.
.

 

[Skwim]

Thanks, but I use evolution.berkeley.edu. Maybe you should give the link to some internet atheists on this thread.

I would if they had asked, as you did,

"Can someone else give me some answers on why we still have apes and we have humans?"
​

But in short, It wasn't necessary for the other lines of ape evolution to disappear in order for Homo sapiens to emerge.

.

.​

 

[Father Heathen]

I'm ignoring you because you make no sense

This is the creationist modus operandi; to dismiss that which they cannot comprehend, as if reality itself was restricted by their intellectual limitations. "I don't get it...so it can't be true! H'yuk."

 

[ChristineM]

One is a chimp and not an ape ha ha. They do not look alike at all except they're mimicking each other. I'm glad this is such a fine example of evolutionary thinking ha ha ha ha.

A chimp is an ape just as a human is an ape, you display such confusion in creationist thinking, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha

 

[Father Heathen]

Then you haven't learned a thing..

He has no interest in doing so. He will refuse to consider anything that conflicts with a literal interpretation of the bible, regardless of how well substantiated it is. He only hopes to poke holes in what he thinks evolution is supposed to be. It's like interacting with one of those chat bots; their dialog appears to be somewhat human, but their responses aren't quite coherent and they don't actually retain anything from the discussion.

 

[Father Heathen]

I give up. It's too hard for you to discuss in a rational and adult-like manner.

Said the pot to the kettle.

 

[ChristineM]

Oh great. Another internet atheist taking pot shots.

Can someone else give me some answers on why we still have apes and we have humans? That's just like what creation science states. We do not have any mutations. So, evolutiion happened maybe just once millions of years ago and we have no other evidence of mutations?

Only if you you can give answers to why we still have Jews when we have Christians?

I have shown you several examples of mutations/evolution being observed and documented now. Are you trying to kid yourself?