🚀 go-pugleaf

John  Ings <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message news:<gf7690pg29bsabi0fct60t2f0ol65qpkkb@4ax.com>...

> Not scientific opinion with respect to a fact however. 
> 'Superiority' is a subjective matter.
Superiority can only be decided by those wo can think and are aware of
themselves and the environment, even if you call subjective, there's
no-one else to say otherwise. I agree on it being 'subjective'.

> Wrong word there. "Less fit" would be more accurate. 
> As I remarked previously, is a tiger weaker than a rabbit?
> But which is in danger of extinction?
True for the tiger and rabbit. But I'm talking about humans here.

> Not 'somehow'. We trained them.
'Somehow' means we don't know how the adaptationprocess of the
bacteria has worked in this 'training'.

> 
> > Without antibiotics in the
> >first place, it won't be just seven people, I dare to say thousands or
> >more! But that's not going to mean that we aren't able to repel
> >disease NEVER EVER. 
> 
> What makes you think I was arguing that? My point is that either
> species is capable of killing the other. It's no criteria for
> 'superiority'. There are billions and billions of e-coli that we
> aren't killing just as there are billions of us that e-coli isn't
> killing. Is it logical to use casualty figures as a criteria for
> superiority?
No. But my point was that we can overcome disease that could be fatal
to many by using intelligence.

> >WTF has theology has to do with it? I'm talking about science here.
> 
> I'm in alt.talk.creationism
> Theology is very much a consideration in this hothouse of
> vituperation. It's the reason I bristle at this idea of man's supposed
> 'superiority'. That's a Creationist shibboleth.
Aha, agreed.

> Bipedal locomotion, an opposable thumb, and a large brain.
> Many species have evolved one or two of these. We lucked out and got
> all three.
Yes heard of those, good, but large brain isn't complete. Complex
should be added: think of the fable of the 'smart dolphins'. Their
brainsize is equal to ours, but they are probably the dumbest animals
alive because of the homogeneous brain mass.

> >Try to think while your
> >at it, why you are fighting "equal rights" for worms;-) 
> 
> Because the fundamentalist bible-thumper insists that wonderful man is
> the apple of God's eye, his special, deliberate creation and not an
> evolutionary accident.
It's nice, I don't care for the bible. We are a bunch of freaks, so be
it.

> >Call us
> >egoists, but I never heard bacteria, worms and insects called
> >themselves that while they have populated more space on earth than us.
> 
> Called themselves what? Superior?
No, egoists.

[snip]

> Exactly! Now you've got it! 
> That's why in my initial response I asked "in whose opinion?"
:-)

> 
> >Choose between higher
> >or lower organisms. I just don't look into the (completely absent)
> >mind of worms.
> 
> Yes, but what are the criteria for determining 'superiority'?
> You want to use dominance. But what about population size? 
> Or longevity of the species? Or contribution to the ecology?
No one but us decides, it is subjective, but the major thing is:
there's no one else to object to our decisions. Awareness is major
criterium.

 
> >Also, to discuss the scientific fact that 'information gain' (with a
> >greater cerebrum) and therefore an accelerated evolutionary benefit
> >for us, is a good thing on the long run,
> 
> Good thing according to who?
"good thing on the long run": Good for our (short or long) survival on
this mudball. According to no-one, because no-one knows.


> 
> > one has to understand or
> >study the cerebrum. Whoever said that it is getting 'unstable' in the
> >future is himself unaware of it's capability, plasticity and
> >biological features. No-one nowadays understands the brain, only a
> >fraction of it. So making negative remarks about it NOW isn't smart,
> >and most bad PREDICTIONS are totally crap, based on chaos theories or
> >diseases which are irrelevant. DNA technology in medical science will
> >be able to alter and adjust genetic problems in the future. Try let
> >your stupid worms to do that! Inferior, you bet!
> 
> In your opinion.... :-)
DNA technology will let be able to grow new organs, treat degenerative
diseases and slow down the aging process. These aren't opinions.


> >> ## Man is creation's masterpiece;  but who says so?-  Man!
> >
> >Man rulez, worm arselicker ;-) Worms are evolution's 'background
> >noise', they need to be filtered out.
> 
> Ha! Without them you'd starve to death. They form a vital part of the
> soil ecology.
Probably, but I can say killerbees... I hate bugs too. [opinion] ;-)

> And there are a good number of other species, including even simpler
> single-celled life forms, on whom all life on earth depends. Yes we're
> at the top of the food chain, but we're still dependent on what's
> under us.
Don't defend the theologists with the "animals serve us" theory.

> 
> ## We are but a fortuitous concourse of atoms..  
> Cicero
Atoms are mysterious (sorry but we really dont know) balls of energy.
What are these balls? Where do they come from? Remains a mystery. I
wanna know!!

Untill then, peace!

--------------
Hostman