Comments on: What on Earth Evolved?… by Christopher Lloyd

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 22:36:01 +0000

The review on this one does flip my mind, I don’t understand what it is trying to say…

But moving on from that – during my childhood I was taught Christian teachings and then taught Darwin teachings. I understood both, then one day the teacher of Darwin said something quite inappropriate as a school teacher.

This lead me down the path of exploration and the conclusion I came to was that the divine being (whatever that means) and the various religions are not incompatible with evolution.

All these things lead to the same thing, but it is difficult for people to see.

By: JD

JD — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:35:56 +0000

another book that might help you understand the evolution of mankind (or it might just confound the issue with his flip style of writing)

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1557788367?tag=onecosmos-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1557788367&adid=0F9AM46BX2K9JZ6K61QX&

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:00:47 +0000

So where does that leave us with describing the species (and the male/female of said species) that is Homo Sapiens without getting bogged down with the finer details of language or inappropriate labelling?

It is open to interpretation but does the “woman” bring “woe” or “woo”? Just a thought

By: Andrew Scott

Andrew Scott — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 20:18:22 +0000

Yeah but woman has “man” in it too, so the general “human” becomes, more specifically “woman” easy enough (she who brings woe?), and human also becomes “man” when a bit of human (?or a bit of humanity?) is left out, which matches the genetics of the male-creating chromosome which is a stunted relic of a female one (with all the nonsense removed, or all the culture and sensitivity removed, whatever is your bias!).

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:41:08 +0000

It is a very interesting book

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:40:13 +0000

I think the biggest distinction between the two sections is not that it is unnatural for humans to intervene, more that it can be done on a bigger scale with wider impact due to technology. Another thing that stands out is that some of the things that humans do are purely for pleasure whereas (most) other species actions are for survival.

Well I tried human instead of man but it still has ‘man’ so maybe I should revert to Homo Sapiens but there again that is a bit of a mouthful… Oh see how easily confused I get

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:22:43 +0000

I think you would like the book, it gives lots of interesting facts about the different species that are listed. All though it mentions evolution in the title the book is really about the impact of different species on the planet and each other.

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:15:11 +0000

That sounds interesting too, I haven’t heard of that one before.

By: Andrew Scott

Andrew Scott — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:11:30 +0000

I do have a problem with quite common statements like… “by looking at 50 species that evolved in the wild without intervention and 50 species that have thrived due to man’s intervention.” because “man’s intervention” is as natural as the intervention by all sorts of other species in the selected 50 that supposedly evolved “without intervention”. ALL species eveolve through constant intervention with one another. “Man’s intervention” is just another example of natural processes at work, because everything man does is natural – it is just Man behaving naturally. We ARE ourselves “in the wild”, because our technology etc is just part of what humans in the wild eventually do. But of course, I know what is meant by the distinction, but the artificial attempt to label things that one selected species (ie Man) does to others as somehow unatural is not good thinking. I also don’t like our species being called “Man”, by the way, but since you are a woman and you used it without complaint I’ll let than one pass (almost

By: Ellee

Ellee — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:06:10 +0000

It’s certainly a great title.