You toss out such odd sentences. What is that trying to say?
Rather than leaving it to my guesses, don’t suppose you can add any detail to that?
What are you claiming?
What evidence helped you arrive at that claim?
What the heck does Darwin have to do with it?
What “point” is it that Darwin passed?
Logic leads many astray (as your wildly inaccurate climate musings demonstrate) you got to stick to evidence and (“good faith”) learning by accumulating more evidence.
This can be seen today with the difference between common Chimps and Bonobos.
Both were tested to see if chimpanzees can function cooperatively.
The Bonobos ( matriarchy) far outperformed the Common Chimps (patriarchy) by a mile.
They finished the cooperation test with the matriarch in charge long before before the common chimps stopped quibbling who was in charge at all.
Darwin claimed that domesticated breeding of animals made the domesticated animals more lacking in intelligence and more achromatic.
I doubt that very much. I’ll need to see that in print.
It completely depends on the selection and breeding of specific qualities.
The Border Collie dog is an extremely intelligent dog and its colorings are a result of breeding several breeds for their separate qualities into one dog.
OTOH The Dutch Friese Holstein cow was bred for milk production and gentle temperament,
It always comes down to selection , be it natural selection or artificial selection.
If you select and breed for specific advantageous qualities that’s what you will get.
Was mankind selected and breed for specific qualities?
Well yes, like all creatures, our environmental conditions selected and “breed” humans according to the immediate pressures of the moment.
But it was a culling process, some survived because they coped better, others didn’t. The surviving creatures (and species) were better adapted, until conditions once again changed, then it got more complicated.
Meaning it wasn’t a breeding with forethought, Earth does breeding through attrition.
I agree. Less adapted individuals did not survive to breed. Hence the more adapted individuals survived to procreate and establish their genes in the gene pool.
This is a process where small beneficial mutations in the genes gradually create more desired adaptations over time. This is why the complete definition is “evolution via natural selection”.
As to man, it is my opinion that man is a result of a single large beneficial mutation, i.e. the fusion of two separated chromosomes into one single larger chromosomes that produced an accelerated growth in the hominid brain of a common ancestor.
Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
Alec MacAndrew
Introduction
All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor’s chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.
…more
Let us re-iterate what we find on human chromosome 2. Its centromere is at the same place as the chimpanzee chromosome 2p as determined by sequence similarity. Even more telling is the fact that on the 2q arm of the human chromosome 2 is the unmistakable remains of the original chromosome centromere of the common ancestor of human and chimp 2q chromosome, at the same position as the chimp 2q centromere (this structure in humans no longer acts as a centromere for chromosome 2.
Conclusion
The evidence that human chromosome 2 is a fusion of two of the common ancestor’s chromosomes is overwhelming.
Chromosome fusion
It is my opinion that this first generation of large brained hominids were able to formulate questions about their relationship to the environment, including the concept of unseen but powerful warring “skybeings” that caused loud noises (thunder), fire (lightning), water (rain), huffing and puffing (wind) and the concept of gods .
That is why Thor (by any other name) is one of the oldest gods in existence. He is the god who controls the weather.
A aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
You are right only when referencing scientific theory.
@mrmhead is right that anyone can have any theory
Well, that is stretching it. I know the term is used in casual conversation but its correct application is a logical proposition based on a set of facts that are demonstrably true.
“me-thinks” is not quite at the level of “my theory”… 
There is no universal purpose to “evolution via natural selection” at all, unless the mathematical equation is used by humans to artificially breed some animal or plant species for desired properties. But that is a human invented purpose.
The universe works on a stochastic mathematically deterministic principle.
It is a logical process that selects for balance and durability in a dynamical environment that places stresses on self-organizing patterns and tests them for sustainability.
There is no intent or purpose, but there is a probabilistic result in that, given sufficient time and resources, self-organizing patterns will emerge and everything we see when looking at the universe is a result of natural self-organizing evolutionary mechanics.
Chaos Theory is based on that observation.
Chaos theory is an interdisciplinary scientific theory and branch of mathematics focused on underlying patterns and deterministic laws, of dynamical systems, that are highly sensitive to initial conditions, that were once thought to have completely random states of disorder and irregularities. Wikipedia
This clip is a very interesting lecture on mathematics and in particular of the human symbolic number 4/3. Seen from different perspectives this number represents a host of natural geometries. Watch this delightful little lecture by Roger Antonsen.
Yes, but I believe tens of thousands of years of the first generations of the human species order of primates are analogous with know data of the brain stages of the human infant, https://speechblubs.com/blog/child-brain-development-stages/
A large amount of time is used to make the synaptic brain connections. I extrapolated current data of time consumed now to represent the infant brain to the infant brain of the brand new species. The DNA of this periodic would appear as animistic images of your references to powerful warring “skybeings” that caused loud noises (thunder), fire (lightning), water (rain), huffing and puffing (wind) and the concept of gods.
I believe our evolution during this time of pure animism is the foundation for our human being and our humanism… Are we in the same ball-park of scientific human history?
I call it “speculation”. It’s fine, as long as you don’t say it’s science, or put it on par with a scientific theory. If you go back a few hundred years, it was the kind of thing that led to the science we now have, so we are definitely capable of it, anyone can look at a tree or dissect a caterpillar and have something to say. There was a guy from the Galapagos who was just taking care of the turtles, and he made observations that could only be made by having so much contact with them. His thoughts were eventually considered data for the scientists.
[quote=“pointpath, post:32, topic:7987”]
Yes, but I believe tens of thousands of years of the first generations of the human species order of primates are analogous with know data of the brain stages of the human infant, https://speechblubs.com/blog/child-brain-development-stages/
From your excellent link.
When we are born, the human brain is equipped with a certain number of brain cells, also known as neurons.
This is the medical estimate when brain cell growth begins and reaches viability.
‘The Ethical Brain’
No sustainable or complex nervous system is in place until approximately six months of gestation . The fact that it is clear that a human brain isn’t viable until week 23, and only then with the aid of modern medical support, seems to have no impact on the debate. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/books/chapters/the-ethical-brain.html#
and from your link:
**However, the connections between the neurons called synapses develop rapidly. In fact, “one million new neural connections (synapses) are made every second” in early childhood, which is more than any other time in a child’s life. So, what influences and affects how neural connections are made through a child’s brain development stages?
And here is where human DNA becomes critically important.
First, humans are the only hominid with 23 pr chromosomes, whereas all other great apes have 24 pr chromosomes. This is the result of a spontaneous fusion between 2 chromosomes into one larger that most likely resulted in more complex brain growth in humans.
Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
Alec MacAndrewAll great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor’s chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.
More…
Conclusion
The evidence that human chromosome 2 is a fusion of two of the common ancestor’s chromosomes is overwhelming. (http://www.evolutionpages.com/images/hum_ape_chrom_2.gif)
This major and rare beneficial mutation by the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes into one larger chromosome. is clearly the emergence of the human species. As this is a clear demarcation point where “homo intelligences” emerged and split from the other large apes, along with the much greater intelligence that allowed the new species to leave the trees and learned to live in caves and explore the plains and coastal regions.
Since we know early childhood brain development stages are based largely on learning through sensations and environment, relationships are essential for healthy brain development. Healthy and happy relationships between a child and his/her caregivers help the brain develop in the following ways:
- Early interactions between children and caregivers (smiling, cooing, crying) develop later into more direct communication like sign language and spoken words;
- When caregivers meet the essential needs of their child they protect the child’s brain from excess stress;
- Simple activities like reading, talking, and singing all help increase neural connections in a child’s brain to further a child’s desire for learning activities.
I believe the advent of the mutation to a larger , more complex brain (the hunab brain may have as many as 100 0 trillion synapses.let alone through the rest od the body;s neural networks
A large amount of time is used to make the synaptic brain connections. I extrapolated current data of time consumed now to represent the infant brain to the infant brain of the brand new species. The DNA of this periodic would appear as animistic images of your references to powerful warring “skybeings” that caused loud noises (thunder), fire (lightning), water (rain), huffing and puffing (wind) and the concept of gods .
The current normally evolved Chimpanzees do have some rituals that reminds of a kind of homage to “unseen beings” living in the sky or in the rocks.
The “rain dance” may well have originated with the first human and copied by our closest cousins that must have intermingled for a time, until we may have been banished because of our superior intelligence , but weaker body.
I believe our evolution during this time of pure animism is the foundation for our human being and our humanism… Are we in the same ball-park of scientific human history?
I can identify with your logic. I hope that I have offered some additional useful information that tends to support your perspective.
p.s. here is a chimp performing a “ritual with a sacred tree”.
Chimp Temples:
I will let this go but it is not a stretch at all. I think you are conflating scientific theory to incorporate your or anyone else’s theory as if it had the credentials of a scientific theory.
The statement anyone can have a theory about anything without proof is a typical, even mainstream starting point for interesting conversation and is a true statement. The reverse is true for a scientific theory
There was a guy from the Galapagos who was just taking care of the turtles, This sentence is not even true.
Sorry, Darwin: Chemistry never made the transition to Biology,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India Mobile: +91-9748906907, Email: bns@scsiscs.org
Abstract
The term biology is of Greek origin and means the study of life. On the other hand, chemistry isthe science of matter, which deals with matter and its properties, structure, composition, behavior, reactions, interactions and the changes it undergoes. The theory of abiogenesismaintains that chemistry made a transition to biology in a primordial soup. To keep thenaturalistic ‘inanimate molecules to human life’ evolution ideology intact, scientists mustassemble billions of links to bridge the gap between the inanimate chemicals that existed in the primordial soup and anatomically modern humans (AMH).
that seems sarcastic not helpful at all
Sorry pointpath,
You are missing the term Abiogenesis
That change from dynamic chemistry into living organisms happens by the trillions everyday.
DNA is not a living organism. It is a non-living biochemical growth coding. Yet give DNA the right biochemicals and presto, Life!!!
(microtubules responsible for mitosis and a whole lot more, are not living objects )
Abiogenesis happens with every fertilized egg. Life does not need life to emerge from chemical dynamics. It just needs the right chemicals and the right environment.
Where and how do you think this living organism originated?
Do you think that is a lot in the full scope of things? For scientists in a lab it is.
For earth, it is a trivial number.
The earth itself has performed some : 2 trillion, quadrillion, quadrillion, quadrillion chemical experiments during its relatively short life. (Robert Hazen)
First of all chemicals did not assemble to make humans. Chemicals self-organized into the first cell that had a self-duplicating chemical cycle.
One such chemical object is the Krebs cycle.
I hope you know that the human organism requires only some 500 different molecules, of course in very large numbers.
[quote=“pointpath, post:35, topic:7987”]
The statement anyone can have a theory about anything without proof is a typical, even mainstream starting point for interesting conversation and is a true statement.
And exactly what statement did I make without any proof or logical derivative?
The reverse is true for a scientific theory
Then ask Peter Higgs where he got his proof of the existence of the Higgs particle, a particle that cannot exist in this spacetime but for an instant.
Mathematics predicted that under certain dynamic circumstances the boson should become manifest. He brought his maths to Cern and after programming the numbers , presto, Higgs boson became manifest for just an instant before decaying into more fundamental particles and Higgs received a Nobel prize.
For some scientists inductive thinking is as productive as deductive thinking.
One of my heroes is David Bohm and Bohmian Mechanics.
No problem, I think that is right. I just hadn’t mentioned it before.
I am not a scientist as you apparently are, I need information from real scientists and have a pretty good track record of sorting them out.
