

/r/science won't allow it so here 're my questions - frade33

First off, let&#x27;s be clear, this is not a religious topic. Only reason I am asking this, I can&#x27;t get Evolution Theory, even though It&#x27;s not like I completely disagree with it.<p>1. We are perhaps the only intelligence species that exists or have existed on earth.<p>Does our Intelligence had any part in the formation of our physical body. Let me ask you in layman terms, If our body was like Elephants, Could we have made as much progress as we did today. The physical body we have, totally support our intelligence, is it mere coincidence?<p>2. It&#x27;s little weird, that every sci-fi movie (avatar) features ET life according to the atmosphere of their planets. Why it isn&#x27;t in reality true so far. Again in layman terms, Who said &#x27;O2 and H2O2&#x27; are the standard for life.<p>If life had to begin at its own, like it did on earth, why could&#x27;nt life2 or life3 begin on other planets according to their own atmospheres, as depicted in Avatar Movie.
======
wpietri
Your phrasing and writing style are a little erratic, so perhaps that's why
you're not getting a good response elsewhere. You might do more editing before
you post if you'd like to get taken more seriously. But I think the questions
are reasonable ones.

Neither of your questions can be fully answered. Until we've seen a bunch of
kinds of life, it will be hard to generalize. It's like trying to theorize
about languages in general if you've only ever heard one. It's a lot easier to
think about if you have a bunch of examples.

Regarding the first bit, I understand that's a topic of quite a bit of
disagreement. Early AI pursued a brain-in-a-jar approach, implying that
physicality was irrelevant. Others differ. If you dig up the great documentary
"Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control" you can see robot scientist Rodney Brooks
talking about how intelligence and embodiment are very much related. (Since he
went on to found iRobot, he's clearly no slouch.) I haven't kept up, but I'm
sure there's a lot of interesting work that's still being done in this area.

Regarding the different bases for life, again, we can't say. There's been a
lot of speculation of other ways life could be, but we've only got one kind to
look at so far, and it's pretty hard to just go and check out a few thousand
other planets to see what has cropped up.

~~~
frade33
it's 3am, here. up from 10am. so i'd request pardon my language, i was being
bit lazy, and obviously english is not my first lang.

It's interesting., other guys have agreements and disagreements over it, since
science wasn't my major, so until now, i used to believe it's only me. and
sometimes too scared to ask it at the risk of for being too stupid.

I can't believe, if we had a physical body like snake, elephants, we could
ever had come thus far. at best we hv had an advanced jungle but nothing more
than that. perhaps I could be wrong, but this just doesn't settle with me.

As for the 2nd part, why we look anywhere else, Why we don't have life on lets
say Mars. If we can understand the 'essence' or whatever, of Evolution theory,
then we must have our martians cousins too no?.

------
yaur
"We are perhaps the only intelligence species that exists or have existed on
earth." Citation needed. Tool use, language, and many other "human" features
have been observed in nature. What is definitely true is that humans are the
only species that we are able to reliably communicate with. Note that while
snakes and elephants are physically incapable of using tools, doing so doesn't
necessarily require hands (see
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlh0cS2tf24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlh0cS2tf24)).

~~~
frade33
by intelligence i meant, reaching to mars, moon. even a dog is pretty
intelligent, so is chimp. but as we know, chimp haven't invented a wheel or
bicycle as yet, at their own.

~~~
CocaKoala
If you're setting the bar for intelligence at "reaching the moon", then aren't
you saying that there were no intelligent species on the planet at all until
July 21st, 1969?

You need to set your terms much more clearly before there can really be a
discussion. It seems like you're trying to say that invention is a hallmark of
intelligence; well, how do you define invention? Is it just taking an object
and using it for a purpose other than it's natural one? Crows do that; there
are documented incidents of crows using sticks as tools to solve puzzles.
Crows were flying before humans were; by your own logic, that seems to
indicate that crows are actually smarter than we are.

~~~
frade33
So you are saying chimps or dogs can make their own space shuttle let's say in
next 50,000 years? or for that matter any other species of animal.

~~~
CocaKoala
I'm confused; first you said that reaching the moon was a hallmark for
intelligence, and now you're saying that reaching the moon within the next
50,000 years is a hallmark for intelligence?

If we find life in another solar system, are you going to deem them not
intelligent because they haven't reached our moon?

The point that I'm trying to make here is that you're setting a very arbitrary
flag in the sand when you say "Everything to the right is intelligent,
everything to the left is not". You need to define your terms much much more
clearly and unambiguously; you need to point to specific attributes that
humans display which no other animals display and say "This is the mark by
which I judge us intelligent". Saying "Well we got to the moon" doesn't do it,
because obviously we were intelligent long before we got to the moon. And if
we were intelligent long before we got to the moon, by what right do you have
to say a chimp or a dog isn't intelligent until they do? Maybe chimps just
don't care; maybe dogs are afraid of heights.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Silly; chimps and dogs haven't a fraction of the concentration, mental
modeling nor communications skills needed. That part is unambiguous. Those
things are often measured as part of measuring intelligence in humans. Ergo,
chimps and dogs are not as intelligent as humans, by far.

~~~
CocaKoala
Sure; I'm not arguing that they are. If you say that chimps and dogs fail to
display specific attributes that humans do (e.g. concentration at a certain
level, mental modeling, sufficiently advanced communication skills), I won't
argue with you because my knowledge of BCS isn't high enough for me to
participate at a meaningful level.

But the OP didn't do that; he said that dogs and chimps aren't intelligent
because they haven't gone to the moon and until he starts defining his terms
in the same clearcut way that you have, it's impossible to really discuss the
point he's trying to make.

edit: Also, the original point the OP made wasn't "Dogs and chimps are not as
intelligent as humans", the point was "Humans are the only intelligent species
on the planet". And while you can make an argument to say that dogs and chimps
are not as intelligent as humans, I would contest your saying that dogs and
chimps do not display intelligence, full stop. And I would further contest (as
I've been doing) the statement that the boundary for intelligence vs. however
you'd describe a vacuum of intelligence is the arbitrary point of landing on
the moon, or even being within 50,000 years of doing so.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Yeah OP was silly, agreed. There are humans that opt out of technology, and
not because they're dumb.

~~~
frade33
Technology is result of our wisdom, if one does not uses technology, that does
not mean, that human is not intelligent,. The topic was intelligence and our
physical body that apparently is perfect to support the intelligence we have.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Same could be said of any animal? And just because animals don't express our
sort of technology doesn't mean they can't.

~~~
frade33
do we have to redefine intelligence and technology :) or should we stick to
the definition we all know :)

All I could make of your comment, other animals are like us, but they are not
nerds. :)

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Say we discover dolphins are doing something amazing and complicated under all
that water. Its not hospitals or lasers, but pretty cool. So are they
intelligent? Not like us surely, but their environment would mold their
inventions to look very different from ours.

~~~
frade33
I rather gave an example of chimp which is not only our relative but also i
guess the most intelligent animal other than us.

But something is evidently clear, i am not talking in religious terms, rather
layman. I am not the sort of animal as other are. Why is it so. Lets figure it
out. But when we do, we will have to look beyond the basics of evolution
theory, Evolution theory itself, is not completely wrong. But if you instead
start analyzing that Nedenethals were actually the prototype for the end
product 'homo sapiens'. It may solve all the mysterious that surround the
evolution theory. And the final part was, I am not willing to believe 'life'
sparks at its own as says Evolution theory, It was sparked. If it did spark at
its own, what is keeping it from on mars., as I was of the view, self-starting
life can begin at its own, according to the atmosphere of its planet.

On the other hand, if when someone say 02 and h202 are the standard for life.
don't you think it proves the religion point, a standard was intentionally set
so that life could not take place on other planets. as we are the only
'visible' intelligent, there are two other intelligent species other than us
according to religion. angels, and jinns but both are invisible according to
the religion.

I wonder since religion says Jinn are as intelligent as humans beings are and
were created zillions ago than human being, what they have been cooking up, if
they really exist, when I tell they are the alien, everyone would dismiss me
as being a lunatic. :) But if you can believe in aliens why not in jinn being
the alien which religions validates too, and there is no validity of any kind
for aliens most people talk about. :)

~~~
CocaKoala
what?

------
CocaKoala
I don't know why I'm responding, this topic is pretty clearly dead, but here's
another thing for you to consider. Your point 1 mentions how "the physical
body we have, totally support our intelligence, is it mere coincidence" [sic].
We adapt to the bodies we have; other animals adapt to the bodies they have.

Albatrosses use a technique called dynamic soaring and can fly across
literally the entire ocean without flapping. They've pretty clearly adapted to
their bodies; do you feel the development of that technique doesn't indicate
intelligence?

