OT- Evolution

[pmulcahy11b]

Here's an interesting view on how arrogant humans have become as a species. I read it in Popular Science a few years back (I'll try to get you the exact issue; I probably scanned it and it's some where on one of my hard drives).

The current OPPLAN in the case of an open landing of extraterrestrials on US soil (i.e., they aren't trying to hide, land in a public place with no attempt to hide themselves -- I think the article gave the example of a landing on the Washington Mall), the plan is that the spacecraft would immediately be boarded by armed troops in Level 4 biological gear and we would take control of it. The actual ETs would be taken to one of several possible secure facilities around the country (the CDC and Fort Dietrick are a couple of the places mentioned) and placed in complete isolation until the government decides that they prove no threat.

Here's the one-foot kicker: Even an intelligent ET species is, by US law, considered to be an animal -- a complex biological creature, but not human -- and our government is under no obligation to afford the ETs any of the rights one might give to a human.

Here's the two-foot kicker: US law would also classify them as illegal aliens, which means that we would have the right to imprison them and put them through the immigration system. On top of that, if our wonderful government felt that they posed any harm, the full force of the PATRIOT Act could be brought against them. (Assuming that we don't just fall back to "animal" definition and kill them, then possibly even serve them up for dinner in a light wine sauce.)

What really got me about that article is that the US government thought that if an extraterrestrial species advanced enough to travel the stars were to land on the Washington Mall, we could manage to do ANY of that to them.

[ShadoWarrior]

What really got me about that article is that the US government thought that if an extraterrestrial species advanced enough to travel the stars were to land on the Washington Mall, we could manage to do ANY of that to them.

Sounds like whomever wrote that 'plan' watched the original early 50s version of The Day the Earth Stood Still, failed to learn any of the messages the story was trying to impart, and wants to make the exact same stupid, silly mistakes the US government makes in that movie.

We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality -- Ayn Rand

Which is a simple fact that, unfortunately, none of the major political parties in the U.S. comprehend, especially the far-right ones.

[ArmySGT.]

Do the other "apes" think about this, or try to explain it too each other Do they try to change their environment by building cities and roads Do they establish scientific theories, or religions

A group of Chimpanzees was noted to have evolved a method of cooperation almost human. War. Somewhere in Central Africa just recently observedl

This group gets together something like 200 maybe more. They invade the territory of another group of chimps and drive them out. Seizing food sources and living space.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

A group of Chimpanzees was noted to have evolved a method of cooperation almost human. War. Somewhere in Central Africa just recently observedl

This group gets together something like 200 maybe more. They invade the territory of another group of chimps and drive them out. Seizing food sources and living space.

I don't know if you were aware of it but the study also found that the chimps would patrol their territory if tensions between them and an adjacent group were high. It was surmised that they were doing it to prevent the opposition from attacking.

[Legbreaker]

The cosmic microwave background is 'hard' evidence. It's the "proof" of the big bang. What is not well understood is the cause of the bang, not it's existence.

By "hard evidence" I was trying to say that the data is there, but the interpretation of it could be off. It's not my area of expertise though but as the data has only been known a realtively short time (a few decades) and fossils, etc have been known about for much much longer....

Anyway, the point is simple - not many scientific types go to war/declare jihad/crusade when their ideas and beliefs are challenged.

[Targan]

A group of Chimpanzees was noted to have evolved a method of cooperation almost human. War. Somewhere in Central Africa just recently observedl

This group gets together something like 200 maybe more. They invade the territory of another group of chimps and drive them out. Seizing food sources and living space.

I'm a supporter of the idea of great ape personhood (as in I think the non-human great apes should be recognised as being people of a sort and afforded at least some of what we consider to be "human rights"). I know a fair bit about the great apes, too. When I was a kid I wanted to be a paleoanthropologist when I grew up and I still have a deep interest in the biological sciences.

Chimps making war on other chimps is nothing new. It has long been known that rival chimp tribes make war on one another. They'll even take up arms (thrown rocks and lumps of wood). Chimps can be vicious little bastards, in captivity or in the wild. The other species of non-human great apes tend to be much nicer people, on average. Orangs and Bonobos are quite peaceful.

In many ways I think the non-human great apes are on much higher moral ground than humans. They exist in their environments without causing any serious long-term damage. If left alone they could keep living their simple lives, generation after generation, for millenia. The way humans are going we're likely to make much of our environment toxic, possibly even uninhabitable, within a century or 2. And as we drive ourselves into extinction we'll take most other species into the abyss with us.

Oh yeah, we're sooo smart.

[Raellus]

Religious fundamentalists have a problem with evolution because it contradicts the creation described in Genesis. They view the Bible as literally true and factual throughout. Any evidence that challenges any one of those assumed truths recorded in the Bible therefore threatens the entire foundation of their belief system.

I can't remember who said it, but I find this quote says it all: "It is easier to ignore an inconvenient fact than to adjust an entire belief system." (I'm paraphrasing here.)

Myself and many other more "liberal" Christians tend to view much of the Old Testament as being largely allegorical. There are inherent spiritual and moral truths in many of tales, even if they are not necessarily literally true in the sense that they happened exactly as described in the Bible (say, for example, the story of the Flood or Jonah and the Whale). This way of thinking, however, is anathema to Christian Fundamentalists. To them, it's an all or nothing proposition.