The Evolution of Morality (3-5)

another common criticism of evolution is that birds could not have evolved from dinosaurs because they would have to go from having a fully functional bar wait that's too much mutation from one generation it means it would be a long long and during the intermediate stage we're in a partially feathered arm wouldn't yet be functional as a linker and because such a dramatic transition might also diminish the function of the arm that natural selection being blind and I've dieted not having any future goal in mind wouldn't be able to take such an adaptation works like summer is the argument is what could is half-awake wouldn't need over after provides the best illustration of this their fossils were commonly found among the eggs as this relatively recent but already outdated patient shows that something up their name they were thought to be a thieves obviously it's not stealing in details this is one of the most informative fossils ever discovered because it singularly addresses a number of earlier misconceptions there is no reason again unless it were warm-blooded now these four might've notices called meta reference which building wrists and fish bones and many other avian features and that through other lines of evidence and also discovered that the other members of this family also had feathers here indicated on the arm of Velociraptor this being a red square they're slightly shows a detail of that spicy is the same thing on the bone of the turkey and we see it fully dressed with feathers a slight beam this is on the arm of a vulture interesting part was wrong too as after definitely more like this now the size of the wing is depicted by a feather impression like to depress so we know the waiting so many of these we're actually no bigger than that's of courses and we cannot fly what can it did what does would have wing be remember the feathers are much better insulation and then further and where is the arm the feathers enable this animal to better insulate a larger clutch of exit with normally evidence that comes to be environment so obviously more young or to an over effort would happily than the world with new wings at all her cheese will be passed down through the other generations whereas dinosaurs but the thinner limit or done with diminished but she's just passing on traits from some particular placement of feathers she's passing on traits of maternal bonding this is where dinosaurs a distinct from the common concept of reptiles there are many species whose appearance role is so slight that they must be born fully capable these are the species commonly referred to as cold-blooded in both the literal before the yet little and horrible sex the only animals with compassion for those who wants dependent and so the kathleen here rather like the memories that give our class its name and force based on funding that is already innate in dogs it causes us to turn the interval which is a bond of trust with monkeys like ourselves male only two teams left they require that we actually call our young just as mathematically obvious that a creature that does not need it she has an evolutionary advantage of what it will it is that much more advantageous to have a parent who dedicates their own existence when the preservation of their spawn and of course we all know of others many species will risk their own lives to that end was brief even the concept that all tourism arguably the most noble of all behaviors is it only of others who show it as evolution integrates these traits and eventually convince them into our reproductive drives we feel the loss of our babies and grieving mothers will actually about being orphans of another and they don't even have to be of the same species this fulfills a need on both their heads but while maternal bonds are the most compelling examples devotion typically think of they're not without parallel when we come to the larger spectrum of the social realm ants termites and peace have a social order of selfless commitment that is alien to anything vertebrates can relate to because the individual is insignificant completely lost I'm in the needs of the very collector the dominant collective I should say and the closest comparison we can make is the herd mentality and so it's like the old joke or two guys are running from a bear and one says you can't outrun a bear I just have to run faster than you critics of evolution would say this callous selfish is looking out for number one he's the best we can expect from the natural selection but what an attorney with such an inclination also be passed out like any other trainer when I was 12 years old back in the Nixon years like you said I was walking home from to nearby middle school now and I instructed a murder of crows in the statement and one of them left behind couldn't fly WI you seem healthy enough what they get away so for one brief and glorious moment from the photo by having petrol and then they had this ominous sensation I looked up and saw promo club large black birds descending on yours truly and then was hammered in the back of the head all the way home ins and all the way to school the next day and all the way home again as well every day on my way to school or on my way home I was hounded by these voracious Birds nobody believed me by the way going on in my everyday life and it kept on until the weather got warm enough that I stopped wearing my brown corduroy jacket I was unable to cross the field safely and see all the birds gathering expectantly for some corduroy kid

The idea of an afterlife completely diminishes the use of survival in the real world. Religious extremists are those who believe that their holy laws are the most important thing even to the point that if everyone "fell from grace" the extremists would simply say they all need to die. The idea of an afterlife removes this problem all together by making life and therefore the necessity to live and thrive an arbitrary thing. The only thing religious extremists care about is getting people to follow what they believe is right so we can achieve the afterlife. It would make sense if there was an afterlife, but if you remove that, the whole thing falls apart. The only actual thing I believe that sustains religion is the idea that we live more than once and that we get a second chance. Removal of that is a very surreal thing in that it forces you to appreciate what you have. Having more than one life completely removes the fear of death in the same way that multiple lives in a video game alleviates the frustration of dying. Just save and reload. Without the afterlife, the only thing we have is this one life, one planet, one atmosphere, and one chance. What that means is that you'd better not screw up and preserve everything for as long as possible otherwise your species is doomed. Sometimes we have to look beyond ourselves in the real world but that is what makes us Human.

The thought just occurred to me that, if the two men in your hungry bear scenario team up and succeed, they not only have saved both their lives but they now have a huge pile of food and potential clothing and tools. In the Creationist-imagining-of-survival-of-the-fittest, the guy who runs faster may not get eaten but he is now winded, alone, and has no one to help him. Also, the dead guys relatives would be furious that the other guy didn't help him and might seek revenge. So the survivor is at a demonstrable disadvantage to the guys who team up. And this is why evolution favored cooperative instincts.

That reminds me, last year I found a baby crow in my yard, I was afraid my cat would kill or injure it, so I put a wire fence around it, but it wouldn't stay up, so, I put some wood for bracing, and he jumped up, and sailed down to the ground. So, I went and got the cat box, but he didn't want to go in there, he jumped on top, so I carried him to the tree in the front yard. He kept looking up at me with his blue eyes, and when I put the box next to the branches, he jumped up. I went and put the box away, and went back to check on him, and he was gone. His mother was telling him off. Don't play with humans, what are you nuts?! He still trusts me way more than the other crows and lets me walk withing 5 feet of him.

03:41 … I started wondering whether the first minutes about avian supposed evolution from supposedly non-avians were like another footage altogether substituted … ah, warmblooded, hence not born independent.

OK, but no person at all is compassionate in equal measure to each and everyone, indeed, when a person is at all cruel, it is usually out of compassion to someone else to whom the victim of his own incompassion is deemed either to have been previously cruel or to be cruel right now or to risk becoming cruel in the future.

That very obviously involves keeping someone in a faked dependence (a bit like a hostage taking) in the intention of by dependence teaching him compassion, such a step is indeed very cruel and a cruelty which has been on the increase since evolutionists have concluded that compassion is the evolutionary origin of morality.

Theres a documentary out there of this experiment. I tried to find it but couldnt. Wish I could remember what its called.

Fuck I hate that picture of that scorpion mother.I fucking hate scorpions.Got stung by one as a kid. Been terrified of arachnids since.But it's a good example though.I mean the mother scorpion clearly shows a level of morality for her babies. Clearly morality isn't a human trait. The argument "if there was no god then I'd just kill and rape" is so fucking stupid. And if they say that then they're fools. I mean atheists don't have a god. But we're not killing and raping because we can now are we?

Not wildebeests, but buffalos. They do it quite frequently, especially sleeping lions/kittens. but I've never seen or heard of wildebeests killing lions: ) (Sorry for replying to such an old comment, by the way. I see now that it's four months old: )

Why only one reason? Long feather most likely started evolve for a variety of reasons; I base this on the observation that nature often create complex multiple functions. Engineering regard multiple functions as a sign of bad design as it messes up the understanding and maintainability of a system. However, nature is not restricted to avoid complications nor complexity and often ends up with both complex and complicated multiple functionality for the very same feature, structure or process.

How sweet. 🙂 I have a friend of mine she has a cattery and the two queens (pixiebobs) help each other in the same way with raising the kittens, even if only one queen has a litter the other queen help out with washing the kittens etc.

Crows are just one example of an animal besides humans that hold grudges. It's not just from what AronRa described either. I read of an experiment where two men spooked a murder of crows while wearing masks. Every day afterwards they would go back and these crows would attempt to attack them. These crows only ever did this when they wore the masks and never did anything to them when they didn't.

also, there are many videos where wildebeest gang up on lions just about to kill. even a hippo saved a gazelle from a crocodile!

early long feathers may have evolved for agility, grabbing the air to turn the dino better, in smaller it moved asymmetrical to glide, then then flapping made flight.

I've befriended some feral cats around my apartment. I've watched at least 3 generations of cats be born, so I know their familial relationship. Two of these sister cats actually help each other take care of the other sister's kittens.. cuddling, protecting, even suckling. I thought of this when Aron spoke of altruistic behavior in animals.

@kevrs2… Your close, it's actually a paliament of owls. A group of crows is called a "murder… a murder of crows, no joke, weird isn't it? 😉

@0debug I'm actually starting a project of translating many of these videos to spanish (via subtitles). In some cases, a remake would be in order, since some of the concepts and explanations are only in written english during the video and translating that using subtitles would be a bit trickier I think.
It's a long-term goal and it will probably not see light until next year.

@slashingraven I too hear the speech with difficulty at some instances during the video. A transcript would be very helpful.

This is a huge request, but I'm having difficulty hearing what you're saying in several points in the video. Would you be willing to write an interactive transcript of the presentation?

A group of university students captured some crows for an experiment. Afterwards the birds were released. The crows remembered and recognized the students that had captured them, and attacked those students every day for the rest of their tenure at the school.

One fundamental thing you got wrong on this Aron; Jurassic Park was originally written between 1989-1991 and the first two movies were in 1993 and 1997 respectively. Way WAY before it was found Raptors had feathers. You can't blame the moviemakers for that.

Ah, bless you (if you'll excuse the phrase) for knowing that it's a murder.
So they were fooled by a coat? A man here in South England wasn't so lucky with some gulls a couple of years ago. Whatever he wore, however he tried to disguise himself, sea gulls attacked him, and only him, every time he appeared in a certain place in his town. Far as I know, no one ever found out why.

Are you aware of Naked Mole Rats and Damaraland Mole Rats, species of eusocial mammals that seem to function on a hive mentality?

@hertder & AVX: Indeed! that would have been the crux of my argument – assuming he was a sigle real figure (big assumption), he was an uneducated dude wandering the 'holy land' over 2000yrs ago. He doesn't show that much smarts at any point tho he does have wisdom enough to know how to get himself martyred, I'll give you that. Beyond that his advice is rather hokey and certainly geared to the time. Nothing he does shows him as a Son of God, any more than a modern day televangelist.

Crow's are very intelligent.

However, you may want to reconsider the word "altruism" to a certain extent. If the arrangement is mutually beneficial, then it can be considered selfish (in an Ayn Rand sense). It is to one's own benefit that their offspring survive. It is in their (or at least their genes) own self interest. This isn't to diminish any of the nobility of parenthood- just to examine it from a different perspective.

actually you would technically have to say that you believe him to be wiser. Obviously he would not have the vast amount of knowledge that each of us learn even in elementary school.
He grew up in the middle east and had a job that involved working with the hands.

@AntiVenomFangX : Based upon the writings upon "Christ" then my answer would be yes, he is very much smarter. If you want examples I'll be happy to provide them.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Experiments In Sacred Geometry: Music Symbols
Experiments In Sacred Geometry: Music Symbols

Experiments In Sacred Geometry: Music Symbols FREE Meditation MP3: Credits: Geometry Experiment Sacred Crates-Passion Fruit (Lucid Skeems) Sonic Loom presents the 4th Orbita Solaris Sacred Sequence Shamanic Dimensions 1 ★( Psychedelic Sacred Geometry Visuals +fibonacci Dark Goa) The Sacred Geometry in 3D Links- Website- …

What Is Grace? | Why Jesus Brought Grace To Save Us | The Power In The Blood Of Jesus
What Is Grace? | Why Jesus Brought Grace To Save Us | The Power In The Blood Of Jesus

in the previous episode we learn about the mission that Christ came to fulfill during his first coming to the world and that he executed only two objectives to rescue us from sin and hell and to set us free from the enemy’s bondage we learned specifically that he came …