Do Bad Mutations Kill People?

[Subduction Zone]

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?

Or since Americans are largely (not so much anymore) descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans (please note, there is no wish on my part for you to disappear in a cloud of creationist "logic").

 

[ChristineM]

Or since Americans are largely (not so much anymore) descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans (please note, there is no wish on my part for you to disappear in a cloud of creationist "logic").

Good point.

Creationist what???

 

[Subduction Zone]

Good point.

Creationist what???

Ergo the scare quotes.

 

[siti]

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.

Buried in here there does seem to be a genuine question so against my better judgement I am going to offer a couple of observations.

First it is not true that animals do not engage in apparently 'senseless' killings. Cats and dogs routinely kill other animals they are not going to eat. Killer whales will pack hunt large 'prey', stalking them for hours and then having killed the target animal they play with its carcass for a while and then abandon it. I don't know of many that 'wantonly' kill their own species - usually we interpret in-species conflicts as territorial or reproductive battles - but who knows what the animals are really doing according to their own neuro-psychological impulses.

Second, you cannot simply detach psychological and psycho-social aspects from our physiology or from evolution. Our psychology doesn't function in isolation from our physiological nature or from our social nature - its all one package and it has all evolved together.

I don't know on what basis you have determined that 'even mental illness' does not cause a person to mow down innocent victims with a semi-automatic - we have no information about the mental health status of the shooter in the Parkland case (at least I don't) and I'm pretty sure that some mass murderers have been quite properly diagnosed with severe mental health issues. Our natural (evolved psycho-social) desire for justice prompts us to look for 'justice' and hold the perpetrator to account - and suggesting he is a victim of his background and mental health problems seems like a cop out - but I don't think emotion should be allowed to cloud science or justice - one way or the other - if we are going to get the bottom of the question you seem to be asking - why?

The bottom line though - is that from an evolutionary perspective - whatever the proximate cause of Cruz's irrational violent behaviour, the sequence of events that lead up to it do indeed stretch back into a pre-human past. And I do agree that in some cases, and this might be one of them, a humane lethal injection might be the best solution all round. But it has nothing to do with him being more or less ape-like than other human apes, because if we start euthanasing people for displaying animal-like traits, we'll soon be extinct.

 

[ChristineM]

Ergo the scare quotes.

And ergo the what???. The mind actually boggles as such a concept

 

[Darkstorn]

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.

No it doesn't. It explains it by positing that humans are "special" and it would make people feel bad if they realized this isn't the case. It's a form of wishful thinking.

Atheist science explains it via bipedalism.

So, according to your delusions, both "creation science" and "atheist science" make the claim that humans aren't animals? Ok, got it.

Was that so hard for you to understand? Yes, you can't figure stuff out ha ha.

I find you "laughing" at your opposition in a debate forum to be a form of deflection. Considering how nonsensical your explanations for your view are, it seems like you're doing it so you could imagine that instead of everyone laughing at you, you are laughing at everyone. Please tell me how that's working out.

"ha ha"

 

[ChristineM]

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.

Cranial capacity?

See my avatar, a cro magnon skull, human of course but 28000 years less evolved than modern humans.

Interestingly their cranial capacity was 10% to 13% greater than modern humans. So by your creation science yardstick we are de-evolving? Is that what you mean by comparing cranial capacity?


Edit : i knew I'd find a use for that avatar on this forum someday

 

[Sapiens]

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.

No. Hardware before software. Creation science doesn't understand that.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Yet, we had Social Darwinists and Nazis do exactly just that. The racists killed millions. Maybe billions. Even Darwin and his cronies thought there were lesser humans due to evolution. It was pseudoscientific racism. This was one of the products of evolutionary thinking.

Social Darwinism, which is often thrown around like a buzz term, is based in pseudo science. The Nazis did a lot of making up stuff. Hitler was a mad man. Glad you jump immediately to the Nazis as the standard...

Also, Darwin could hold any number of bad ideas and that wouldn't retute the information science uncovers. Who knew being a saint is a prerequisite for being a scientist!?

I see a lot of what you're suggesting as beside the point.

 

[Twilight Hue]

to
No animal would do it (but I suppose someone can train an ape to fire the AR-15 to kill people). .

 

[QuestioningMind]

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?

Many people who live in the USA are descendants of European citizens. Are you baffled by the fact that today we have American citizens, while we STILL have European citizens? If not, then you should not be baffled as to why there are still apes.

 

[gnomon]

I was wondering what evolutionary science has to say about the horrendous shooting at Parkland High School in Florida? If we evolved from apes, then is the gunman more an animal than a human being? If he's found guilty, then is it okay based on evolution that he be terminated by lethal injection? If an ape killed humans, even if for food, then it would be shot or euthanized. If Nikolas Cruz is a human being, then what does it say about evolution? For what reason does a mentally disabled man become a crazed killer showing no mercy and killing students at random? This man or animal fooled those closest to him enough for them to think he didn't have guns, but he did. He had numerous run ins with the law. Even if he was mentally ill, shouldn't we think that he was a bad mutation, i.e. more ape than human, and be put in jail like a killer animal to be euthanized if found guilty?

Some may say evolution has nothing to do with this. If evolution has nothing to do with this, then what purpose does it serve if we cannot apply it to today's society? We still have apes. We have humans. Thus, can we have bad mutations?

Poor form.

 

[HonestJoe]

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.

We know (or can infer) why people with some forms of mental illness act in this way, such as because they perceive threats which don’t actually exist. Also, perfectly sane people will kill defenceless victims if they perceived (correctly or not) a greater benefit from doing so, for example bombing cities in war or executing prisoners.

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.

Plenty of other animals can and do kill their own kind and not always for any readily apparent reason. Other animals seem to be much less inclined to do so. Humans are somewhere in the middle of this scale, it’s only our technical capabilities and intelligent reasoning which marks any distinction.

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.

Of course there could be some genetic elements which play a role in shaping the mind-sets of irrational killers but that wouldn’t imply a “flaw in the mechanism of evolution”, it’s just how it works. It is indeed true that mutations won’t always be beneficial. Mutations are random but the beneficial ones will tend to survive and be propagated. That is beneficial to the propagation of the species by definition though. An individual tragic incident like this is irrelevant on an evolutionary scale.

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.

Physical and psychological are interrelated. Differences in how the physical brain develops will impact psychology and many of those differences will be genetic. Both the physical and psychological elements will exist but that doesn’t mean we’re (currently) capable of identifying and measuring them.

 

[blü 2]

If we evolved from apes, then is the gunman more an animal than a human being?

Human beings are 100% animal to start with.

If he's found guilty, then is it okay based on evolution that he be terminated by lethal injection?

Not in my book. I see only the killer's morality in capital punishment.

If Nikolas Cruz is a human being, then what does it say about evolution? For what reason does a mentally disabled man become a crazed killer showing no mercy and killing students at random?

Because of a disorder of the brain, I guess. It could be morbid obsession, or paranoia, or any number of things.

Even if he was mentally ill, shouldn't we think that he was a bad mutation, i.e. more ape than human, and be put in jail like a killer animal to be euthanized if found guilty?

You seem to think apes have no morality. Most species of ape are gregarious, and have social awareness and instincts to match regarding proper behavior, just as H sap does. If you read the Tanakh, you'll find barbaric Bronze Age diktats like ─

Leviticus 27:28 But no devoted thing that a man devotes to the LORD, of anything that he has, whether of man or beast, or of his inherited field, shall be sold or redeemed; every devoted thing is most holy to the LORD. 29 No one devoted, who is to be utterly destroyed from among men, shall be ransomed; he shall be put to death.​

or

Numbers 31:15 Moses said to them, “Have you let all the women live? 16 Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
​

Does that sound more moral to you than the mores of our fellow apes? Or what about all the biblical rules on the right way to bonk your slaves?

If evolution has nothing to do with this, then what purpose does it serve if we cannot apply it to today's society?

You totally misunderstand evolution. Evolution has no purpose. Evolution is a process occurring naturally in nature, that if your genes are better adapted to survival and breeding than those of the guy hunting next to you, chances are there'll be more of your genes in the next generation than his. And many of your offspring are likely to have the benefit of your advantageous genes.

 

[james bond]

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.

I would be glad to examine her heterochromia, but I wasn't talking about eye pigmentation.

Putting on my atheist science cap. I was referring to epigenetics and in Cruz's case, he would be someone who has the violence gene.

"A 'violence' gene turns some children into video game 'junkies' - and could also be linked to ADHD.

Young people who played more violent video games and watched more brutal TV shows shared a particular gene, research has found."

Scientists discover 'violence gene' that may be linked to ADHD | Daily Mail Online

If Cruz is found guilty and is put to death, then why not examine him and others who are predisposed to committing unlawful violence. While the study of violent behavior has been around for some time, the study of the violence gene hasn't received as much prominence. This is my reason for the thread.

 

[james bond]

We know (or can infer) why people with some forms of mental illness act in this way, such as because they perceive threats which don’t actually exist. Also, perfectly sane people will kill defenceless victims if they perceived (correctly or not) a greater benefit from doing so, for example bombing cities in war or executing prisoners.

Plenty of other animals can and do kill their own kind and not always for any readily apparent reason. Other animals seem to be much less inclined to do so. Humans are somewhere in the middle of this scale, it’s only our technical capabilities and intelligent reasoning which marks any distinction.

Of course there could be some genetic elements which play a role in shaping the mind-sets of irrational killers but that wouldn’t imply a “flaw in the mechanism of evolution”, it’s just how it works. It is indeed true that mutations won’t always be beneficial. Mutations are random but the beneficial ones will tend to survive and be propagated. That is beneficial to the propagation of the species by definition though. An individual tragic incident like this is irrelevant on an evolutionary scale.

Physical and psychological are interrelated. Differences in how the physical brain develops will impact psychology and many of those differences will be genetic. Both the physical and psychological elements will exist but that doesn’t mean we’re (currently) capable of identifying and measuring them.

Then what was the perceived threat in Cruz's case? Rational people have motives such as vengeance, heat of the moment or self defense/prevent great bodily harm to another.

I agree with other animals kill for not other than food or survival, but most do for food or survival. It is difficult to find out why they do so. Are there particular animals more prone to the latter, i.e. violent, but not for food or survival? Can humans learn anything from these animals?

 

[Shad]

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.

You mean Creationism merely copied existing ideas and slapped an easy to consume product label on it. If you think there are no evolutionary based ideas on cranial capacity let alone the actual brain itself you are less informed than I first thought.

 

[james bond]

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.
.

The point of this thread is genetics, specifically epigenetics and DNA. What can you say about DNA between an ape and humans, Skwim?

Have you looked at the model representations of Lucy or pithecus? I can compare its fossils (from different apes) and tell it's BS. 3-ft tall Lucy was a knuckle walker with locking wrists. More likely a chimpanzee.

Is it me who hasn't learned much or is it you, Skiwm? What did you learn from Jack Chick whom you introduced me to -- Big Daddy? ? Is he talking to you from his grave?

Basically, you subscribe to pseudoscientific racism and circular reasoning. Too much here for me disguised as paleontology. What's interesting is that paleontology has stolen cranial capacity from the creation scientists to fill in their evolution of the gaps. Cranial capacity was one of the arguments used to place Lucy as an chimp/ape.

 

[james bond]

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

Oh, the other shoe has dropped. Are you saying we evolved from chimpanzees now? That I was right when I stated that Lucy was a chimpanzee?

 

[ChristineM]

Oh, the other shoe has dropped. Are you saying we evolved from chimpanzees now? That I was right when I stated that Lucy was a chimpanzee?

You have problems reading? I said no such thing and i am offended and insulted that you have to make up bullpoop so score extra god points

Btw, i have a seen lucy and no way is that a skeleton of a chimp.


Edit : tell your creationist buddies that chimps exist now, australopithecus afarensis went extinct about 3 million years ago