Richard Dawkins Explains Why There Was Never a First Human Being

[geo]

I'll tell you what really is the problem here.
The reason people's underwear is in wads over this is because I've questioned Richard Dawkins communication style.
But it's true. Dawkins has been known to cleverly dress up theory as fact. Mostly in his writings.

Actually it took about the first five pages of this thread just to figure out precisely what your problem was with the Dawkins video. Now that we have figured it out, I suppose there's nowhere left to go.

Dawkins' point is that evolutionary change is so gradual that there's never a point where you can say 'here's the first human." Every animal, every person ever born belonged to the same species as its parent. "No homo erectus parent ever gave birth to a homo sapien baby." It's startling to think about evolution in this way, it shows how we limit our thinking by trying to categorize and label everything. And I think this is Dawkins' forte as a science communicator, to show us a slightly different way of looking at things. The thought experiment makes us stop for a moment to consider how all life is connected. Our understanding of evolution is actually a profound and beautiful insight into the nature of the world as it really is.

Dawkins here says nothing that isn't documented and supported by tons of fossil evidence. There are simply no competing theories, none at all. But to those who are so motivated to miss the point, evidence no longer matters.

[sonoman]

Dawkins' atheistic prejudices make all his statements suspect because he's not thinking bicamerally, i.e, holistically. Still not paying any attention to right brain consciousness that is there to give balance to the left-brain's domination of intellectual thinking. And in this he marks the position of the old homo sapiens vis a viz the new homo species evolving right under our noses as the new species will be characterized by holistic, bicameral thinking. Science lags behind religious vision as science has not registered the new species, homo climaxus. See the prophesy I wrote in 1979. http://biomystic.org/homoclimaxus.htm The main reason atheists here cannot defeat any of my arguments and always have to resort to mindless name-calling or posting the atheist mickey-mouse "explanations" of spiritual consciousness, is that they are operating from left-brain linear A to Z thinking, that's what all the constant demand for "measurement" is all about. I was once stuck in that same left-brain dominancy myself in my decades of atheist belief but God broke through my disability and now I see the Light and once seen there's no going backwards to lesser consciousness. Homo Climaxus is both the defining example of continuous evolution within a species but instantly overthrows Dawkins notion that because the outward form is similar that the inward one has not taken a most significant physical leap forward with I would greatly suspect thicker corpus collossum connecting both brain hemispheres in the bicameral minded person. Dawkins sits on one side of our species and projects the unicameral mindset. I sit on the other side with bicameral mindset and I produce new theory and revelation. Dawkins and atheism treads old ground.

[Chris OConnor]

Sonoman, your "revelation" truly is a gift to humanity:

In the future the seas will become habitat for mermen and mermaids...

Thank God for the rampant drug abuse of the 1960's. Who'd a thunk these stoners were actually on the cutting edge of our species evolution:

As a mass movement, the 1960's psychedelic revolution is part and parcel of the human quest for whole brain functioning. Psychedelics increase brain signal transmission across the brain hemispheres, so they too are steps toward internalized whole brain functioning of Homo Climaxus.

[ant]

Dawkins here says nothing that isn't documented and supported by tons of fossil evidence. There are simply no competing theories, none at all. But to those who are so motivated to miss the point, evidence no longer matters

Just quickly..,

No one is disputing here that evolution is a gradual process that is hard to comprehend because of the immensity of time. Dawkins thought experiment was claiming more than that.

There is "tons" of evidence related to a multitude of specific species. What you're doing here is pointing to it all and claiming that any evidence that adds support to an undisputed linear path of origin for any species applies to all species, including homo sapiens. That's not entirely true. Are you saying it is? Are you saying there is an undisputed and complete fossil record for homo sapiens?
What your really saying here is because the Tree of Life has a trunk that leads to one origin, then regardless of the gaps in lineage fossil evidence, we too are children of fish, in a sense.

There are things we must assume to be true, things that can be proven true, and things that need no one to prove them true because they are self-evident.

We must assume here that homo sapiens greats grandfather was a fish. It can NOT be proved and it is NOT a self-evident truth.
An assumption is not based on fact. Dawkins claims it is fact that our greats grandfather was a fish. He is using the word "fact" for an audience he knows defines it differently than a scientist does.

The point I'm making is subtle but one that by definition is true - science, with no means to observe, test, replicate, or falsify a scientific hypothesis will NOT claim it to be an established FACT. A hypothesis is subject to revision at a future time when more data becomes available.

Again, there is more going on here with this collective atheist outrage against my highlighting that the fossil record of homo sapiens is not a clear, linear record and there are REAL questions that are being discussed by science. You can't wipe that away and say it's a fact that our grandpappy was definitely a fish because you're (generally speaking) anxious to go skinny-dipping in the ocean to prove God does not exist.
That's the real motive here. A belief system is at stake because atheists believe that evolution was some final nail in a coffin that buried God. It's all emotion-driven really.
But I understand.

Carry on, please.

[Interbane]

There is "tons" of evidence related to a multitude of specific species. What you're doing here is pointing to it all and claiming that any evidence that adds support to an undisputed linear path of origin for any species applies to all species, including homo sapiens. That's not entirely true. Are you saying it is? Are you saying there is an undisputed and complete fossil record for homo sapiens?

The evidence I listed in my post was all specifically for the recent lineage of homo sapiens. Specific, direct, and plentiful, but still only a small fraction of the total evidence.

We must assume here that homo sapiens greats grandfather was a fish.

Anyone that makes such an assumption is a moron. I know the name of my great grandfather, and he was a human. Quote what Dawkins said here about fish. I'm guessing it was instead a comment from Dexter that you're misunderstanding, and has nothing to do with Dawkins.

Again, there is more going on here with this collective atheist outrage against my highlighting that the fossil record of homo sapiens is not a clear, linear record and there are REAL questions that are being discussed by science.

It appears that you need to do more research. There is enough clarity in the evidence for our lineage that the more recent branches can be considered a fact. Where did your contrary opinion come from? Is it your own, or someone else's?

[ant]

Anyone that makes such an assumption is a moron. I know the name of my great grandfather, and he was a human. Quote what Dawkins said here about fish. I'm guessing it was instead a comment from Dexter that you're misunderstanding, and has nothing to do with Dawkins.

I take exception to your tone here.
I know what Dawkins said and am discussing the lineage relationship in terms of millions of years, hence his usage of the word greatS grandfather. I know he doesn't mean our parents parents.
WTF is wrong with you and why are you calling me a moron.
Stop attacking me for my opinion about Dawkins.
Try being a moderator instead of a prick.

And your guess was wrong, you moron.

[sonoman]

Sonoman, your "revelation" truly is a gift to humanity:

In the future the seas will become habitat for mermen and mermaids...

Thank God for the rampant drug abuse of the 1960's. Who'd a thunk these stoners were actually on the cutting edge of our species evolution:

As a mass movement, the 1960's psychedelic revolution is part and parcel of the human quest for whole brain functioning. Psychedelics increase brain signal transmission across the brain hemispheres, so they too are steps toward internalized whole brain functioning of Homo Climaxus.

On cue, Chris, you demonstrate atheist in denial of any facts that contradict the belief system. I'm sorry but your feeble attempts to slander my generation are nothing but you blowing smoke out your behind because every single one of the environmental movement's protest against unregulated human development is valid today. Every single humanitarian concern my generation marched into is still valid today, including medical marijuana which you diss here to slander me but probably enjoy at home to relax and/or think beyond the little boxes of usual thought processing. You could benefit from greater access to your whole brain with a little psychedelic help. But if you're a control freak and can't stand losing mental control then stick with the atheist day job--as long as it temporarily gets you through the night..

[Chris OConnor]

Explain why you think or how you know...

In the future the seas will become habitat for mermen and mermaids...

[sonoman]

Explain why you think or how you know...

In the future the seas will become habitat for mermen and mermaids...

The idea came with the Homo Climaxus revelation two weeks before I underwent my religious conversion experience in 1979. Our collective unconscious already is quite familiar with the idea and with genetic engineering that will be happening more and more creating bodies that can breathe water and swim efficiently is not so far fetched. It's the "Climax" way of adapting to environmental conditions that will allow human beings much greater environments to colonize as fits our destiny. The earth flower will send out seed people to many other parts of the galaxy as humanity increases in scope and powers. It's not such a leap for someone like me who used to read science fiction a lot before my religious experience stopped that interest. Sci-Fi is our human intellects reaching out to the future conditions that we will be facing some day. But like all fantasies, only a tiny percentage of futuristic notions will actually come about. The universe is very silent for a place as big as it is with as much potential for intelligent life in it. And you know my explanation for that now. The true Frontier is in the spiritual dimension as the physical one can only offer physical formations which are interesting but limited to minds craving something more..our theotropism that is unstoppable.

[johnson1010]

right...

wait what?

Mermaids?