Evidence of a Creator/Creation is obvious. Religion is another matter though

The evidence of creation, for my 2cents worth, is all around and perhaps it is "religionS" that many get hung up on and also the concept of reward and Punishment in an afterlife for how we behave on earth. This I feel is a huge roadblock in finding the truth about how all this (all life forms) happened. That said, I am not a religious person at all. It matters not that an individual is of any given religiosity either in order to reasonably believe in a creator.

The evidence IS all the many different forms of life and specifically how they could have been "given life" along with the obvious evidence of DNA.

For example all one needs to consider is at death all of ones DNA is intact yet death comes anyway. All of a fetus's DNA is intact and yet if aborted to soon from a pregnancy the fetus will die. How we or any species FIRST came into existance is actually unknown to us or we would all certainly know that there was a creator. But there are "road signs" to a creation model.

Consider the fact that once a species is extinct is does not return ie the DINOSAURs (sic) no longer roam the earth and we can surely say there are not going to be any more of them POPPING up anytime soon from "out of the "blue"".

It's more than the classic "which came first the chicken or the egg" argument. IT is evidence that something extrordinary happened long ago to "PUT LIFE" into the many species that it ( a creator) miraculously must of created. I mean it is so simple to see that most individuals miss it. As far as mutations are concerned most likely part of the creation (based on a calculus or math of an extrordinary genius) included those natural mutations. We also know that there are places on earth that have there uniques species (DNA) that are only found in that given part of the world. Why are these species unique to certain areas?

It all points to one--- EVIDENCE OF CREATION.


To suppose otherwise would not be at all logical. How does one get such a high order of the many life forms from a chaos of disorder than we know once existed in the infancy of the planet. What was here millions of years ago. Earth, rock, fire, Ice, water moving continental land masses, Lava,... all chaotic at some point. When did the flesh get onto the bones or the blood into the veins and arterys out of all the chaos?? how could the DNA have formed and then successfully formed and fed and reared the species? What put the breath into a species? Where did instinct come from? ON and on one can go and see the evidence.

Religions were created by Humans. They are fallible. A creation such as is here and as far as we know here only....WOHHHHH. incredible.

pics or it didn't happen.
j/k
anything is possible

This is exactly what this site needs...a thread arguing the merits of creation.

Quote: scire

It all points to one--- EVIDENCE OF CREATION. To suppose otherwise would not be at all logical. .

Your logic is faulty. You think you see a creation,
so you hunt for a creator. First you have to prove
its a creation, which you can't do. You can't start
with an assumption and build on it. You start with
provable facts, and there aren't any.

Quote: scire

Consider the fact that once a species is extinct is does not return ie the DINOSAURs (sic) no longer roam the earth and we can surely say there are not going to be any more of them POPPING up anytime soon from "out of the "blue"".

If that's your argument for a creator, you've got it exactly backwards.

Species don't evolve "out of the blue," but in creation myths they are created "out of the blue." So the lack of Dinosaurs, or anything else, popping up without reason is evidence against the existence of a creator.

BTW, you should try putting on a more coherent argument. I've no idea what you think DNA is, much less what it's supposed to be evidence for (I've a very fair idea that I will regret this reply in shrot order).

Quote: scire

How we or any species FIRST came into existance is actually unknown to us or we would all certainly know that there was a creator.

Unknown, yes, but why, if we knew, would that confirm a creator? How DNA came to be is not something I know. But I do know that mitochondria, the little bits that give cells their energy, where once a parasitic bacteria that became part of us. Firstly, if we were meant to have these, why weren't we created with them? And secondly, since this happened, is it impossible to believe that DNA also has a "natural" explanation? If some nasty little parasite somehow got turned into a part of us, is it so hard to assume that DNA formed naturally in some bubbling bog of basic bits and pieces?

Quote: scire

Consider the fact that once a species is extinct is does not return ie the DINOSAURs (sic) no longer roam the earth and we can surely say there are not going to be any more of them POPPING up anytime soon from "out of the "blue"".

Because the Earth in which dinosaurs came to be no longer exists, and they've been lost to time. It's no different than asking why there are no longer any fish in the Bonneville Salt Flats. There used to be, so how come none ever pop up again? Things change, and some species are no longer fit for this world. I imagine relatively soon some beings may be asking why there are no more humans popping up out of the blue.

Quote: scire

It's more than the classic "which came first the chicken or the egg" argument. IT is evidence that something extrordinary happened long ago to "PUT LIFE" into the many species that it ( a creator) miraculously must of created. I mean it is so simple to see that most individuals miss it. As far as mutations are concerned most likely part of the creation (based on a calculus or math of an extrordinary genius) included those natural mutations. We also know that there are places on earth that have there uniques species (DNA) that are only found in that given part of the world. Why are these species unique to certain areas?

It all points to one--- EVIDENCE OF CREATION.

I'm interpretting this as you believe in evolution, but also believe evolution was a planned event by a creator. OK, I'll roll with that for a moment...

Quote: scire

To suppose otherwise would not be at all logical. How does one get such a high order of the many life forms from a chaos of disorder than we know once existed in the infancy of the planet. What was here millions of years ago. Earth, rock, fire, Ice, water moving continental land masses, Lava,... all chaotic at some point. When did the flesh get onto the bones or the blood into the veins and arterys out of all the chaos?? how could the DNA have formed and then successfully formed and fed and reared the species? What put the breath into a species? Where did instinct come from? ON and on one can go and see the evidence.

This is where belief always loses me. "We don't know, and it's incredibly complex, so it MUST be creation." I don't see how this flies, and to be perfectly frank (and I mean no offense whatsoever) it just seems lazy to me. Contemplation of how things came to be is only a few thousand years old. True thought is even younger than that, and the technology to look even deeper is but 100 years old. We've had 100 years to figure out the past 14 BILLION, and I think throwing it all on creator is way too premature. Some of the questions you've asked are being pieced together, bit by bit, as new theories are tested and new technology comes to light. Given time, I think a lot will be answered in total. But just because it isn't answered in the year 2012 doesn't encourage me to throw up my hands and proclaim it must be a creator. I just can't for the life of me see any evidence as to believe that.

Quote: scire

Religions were created by Humans.

While it's very hard to argue that point, I'll go it one step further.

God was created by man, not the other way around.


Your arguments all stem from a "We are the center of the universe" line of thought. While it was once blasphemous to think otherwise, we now know that's not true.

"Look around us and see the evidence of creation" ? I see the evidence of random chance.

Oh, one more thing Sherlock, who created the Creator?

I'm waiting for the day when we discover the following in human DNA:

"God patent #463527957365948689"....................

deleted

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Oh, one more thing Sherlock, who created the Creator?

Does this now make you the forum's official hostile atheist? :)

Quote: DJTeddyBear
Oh, one more thing Sherlock, who created the Creator?

What a silly question. The Creator's father. DUH ! !

Great! That's all this forum needs is another religious thread. Let me sum this up, nonbelievers are not willing to accept that there might be a God, and believers not willing to accept there might not be one. I don't know why people get into these debates, it's not like people on either side haven't made up their minds already. Trying to get someone to change their minds on a religious view (and not believing in God is a religious view) is a fruitless endeavor. Might I suggest banging your head against the wall for 12 straight hours, it might feel better.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I don't believe in a god(s) but it is possible.

I think there is either 1 or 0 gods. I think if there were more than 1, there would be way too much fighting. Oh, that must be what earthquakes are, when the gods are fighting with each other and shaking the earth!

Quote: FinsRule

I think there is either 1 or 0 gods. I think if there were more than 1, there would be way too much fighting. Oh, that must be what earthquakes are, when the gods are fighting with each other and shaking the earth!

That's what the Romans and Greeks thought right?

I'm an agnostic, I see no proof that a god exists, show me proof, that would stand up to the Scientific Method, then that's a different matter.

What we don't understand we lump into the category of "supreme being did this", and as the decades and centuries goes by we keep looking for the answers which we eventually find and realize no supreme being was needed in the first place.

It seems to me that God is just a small part of what religious folks believe in - the keystone to all religions seems to be an infinite life after death.

This seems to be the thing that really drives all religions - if you follow some book, it's always an old book, you get to live forever after death. No taxes to pay, no work to do, just the Life of Riley forever and ever; don't forget all those virgins too.

Really?

I disagree with you.

Quote: scire

The evidence of creation, for my 2cents worth, is all around and perhaps it is "religionS" that many get hung up on and also the concept of reward and Punishment in an afterlife for how we behave on earth. This I feel is a huge roadblock in finding the truth about how all this (all life forms) happened. That said, I am not a religious person at all. It matters not that an individual is of any given religiosity either in order to reasonably believe in a creator.

The evidence IS all the many different forms of life and specifically how they could have been "given life" along with the obvious evidence of DNA.

For example all one needs to consider is at death all of ones DNA is intact yet death comes anyway. All of a fetus's DNA is intact and yet if aborted to soon from a pregnancy the fetus will die. How we or any species FIRST came into existance is actually unknown to us or we would all certainly know that there was a creator. But there are "road signs" to a creation model.

Consider the fact that once a species is extinct is does not return ie the DINOSAURs (sic) no longer roam the earth and we can surely say there are not going to be any more of them POPPING up anytime soon from "out of the "blue"".

It's more than the classic "which came first the chicken or the egg" argument. IT is evidence that something extrordinary happened long ago to "PUT LIFE" into the many species that it ( a creator) miraculously must of created. I mean it is so simple to see that most individuals miss it. As far as mutations are concerned most likely part of the creation (based on a calculus or math of an extrordinary genius) included those natural mutations. We also know that there are places on earth that have there uniques species (DNA) that are only found in that given part of the world. Why are these species unique to certain areas?

It all points to one--- EVIDENCE OF CREATION.


To suppose otherwise would not be at all logical. How does one get such a high order of the many life forms from a chaos of disorder than we know once existed in the infancy of the planet. What was here millions of years ago. Earth, rock, fire, Ice, water moving continental land masses, Lava,... all chaotic at some point. When did the flesh get onto the bones or the blood into the veins and arterys out of all the chaos?? how could the DNA have formed and then successfully formed and fed and reared the species? What put the breath into a species? Where did instinct come from? ON and on one can go and see the evidence.

Religions were created by Humans. They are fallible. A creation such as is here and as far as we know here only....WOHHHHH. incredible.

The argument from ignorance is not very impressive, intellectually speaking, and ultimately is self-defeating (though it may take a long time).

Let's say you're making an experiment shooting "slow" neutrons within a strong magnetic field. You notrice some neutrons disappear and then reappear. Saying "I don't know why this happened. Surely there must be a god," is 1) a non sequitur and 2) completely useless as ar as science goes.

Scientists will want to know what happened to the neutrons. Why did they disappear? Why did they reappear? What goes on with them in the meantime? Do they become a different particle? Do they go elsewhere? Do they diappear at all or is there some equipment malfuntion? Maybe the researcher just lost track of them.

So you repeat the experiment and check the equipment. Once you're convinced the neutrons are indeed diappearing and reappearing, you proceed to do more research to see what happens? Saying "god did something to the neutrons" leaves you no wiser than saying "something happens to the neutrons."

As it happens I was hearing about this very puzzling experimental result today on my way to work. There's rampant speculation about Supersymetry, the M theory (superstrings), and Dark Matter among other things.

Isaac Asimov once said the most exciting phrase in science is not "Eureka!" but rather "Now, that's funny..."

nudez or it didn't happen!


If there is a "creator" - did the "creator" not then create atheism?

Quote: aceofspades

nudez or it didn't happen!


If there is a "creator" - did the "creator" not then create atheism?

He created the babelfish! How did THAT work out for him?

Quote: s2dbaker

He created the babelfish! How did THAT work out for him?

Babelfish - sounds yummy! Fried with a side of potatoes

Nareed, I didn't want to try and spell DEOXYR....... ACID. sorry. and to lazy to still look it up too! It's pretty obvious " what "DNA" stands for in context but thanks for pointing out my fail.

As far as the "out of the blue" goes in your reply can you not "hear" what you wrote? I respectfully suggest you reconsider. Creationist may differ about the time frame of a "creators work" but its is visionally clear as well as chemically impossible to mix chemical substances, molecules, atoms in a primordal soup or "goo" and pop out a life form, much more, have them turn into a complex life form. Nothing can be proven because we are limited in our ability to "figure it all out". Since science hasn't been able to "prove" evolution, either, it does not mean that we didn't "evolve thru a creation" (mutate)-however- my argument even with it's lack of "mathmatical fact/base" is tenable since there has to be an "exact math with variants" to the complexity of DNA (there i didn't spell it out again!) mankind just hasn't figured it out yet along with as to how "electrical forces" "energized" "life". Please no frankenstein jokes!!

{Getting the order of life OUT OF chaos or accident?} At some point back in the infancy of our planet,moon, and solar system there was the same sun/s, planets asteroids, materials as exist most likely thruout the universe or better said -known universe.

(The conditions that form EARTH with it's atmosphere)-- Has anyone proven out that out of oxygen, hydrogen, sea, lava, heat, fire,cold, explosion, tsunami, asteroids hitting the planet- can form living breathing thinking LIFE?

I am posting here just to kill time like many others.

I still say our own chemistry/complexity is evidence enough.


In my opinion SOME evolutionist's fear that- were creation proven- he/she might just be "stumped" because they might feel that the Christians may have been right all along! By "proving there is a God" the thought of a life after death increases in ones own consciousness would it not? (maybe not--at least with me anyway.) After all "proving" a god or creator might suggest that such would have put into his creation a way to communicate the fact that the creator himself exists and controls all and is part of the creation. Now, were this the case it might then justify a thought process-- that if a creator 'were proven' and is obviously of great intelligence/magnificence then he just may have communicated with humans at some point in history. If this were imaginable (or even so) then it might also be imaginable (or even so) that somehow those who penned much in the past (Bible) may have had some kind of "communication line" to a messenger of the creator. I'm going to end here. Coherent - I hope!


All said in sincerity and with respect with no ill will or malice intended. Realizing that creation might be wrong and contrary to the 'evidence" I suggest as obvious I'll try not to comment on this post again.

Quote: Gabes22

Great! That's all this forum needs is another religious thread. Let me sum this up, nonbelievers are not willing to accept that there might be a God, and believers not willing to accept there might not be one.

I'm a non-believer, but I think I'm open to the possibility of a creator. The only thing I'm completely opposed to is any of the known religions of humankind. I can't even begin to explain how everything came to be. Perhaps, by purpose or accident, some power greater than my imagination set this all into motion. I feel the chances of this far exceed that off flipping tails 1,000 times in a row, but I accept it as possibility. If more evidence comes to be and points even more in that direction, my beliefs would follow the evidence.

But the thought that this being, responsible for not only the millions of forms of life on Earth and their infinite complexity, but the entire, mindblowing vastness of anything and everything that ever is or was, would give more than a fart in the wind for a guy like me, just seems so incredibly pompous.

Quote: scire

I still say our own chemistry/complexity is evidence enough.

Thats because its mysterious and complex to you.
If we don't understand something, we immediately
label it beyond our understanding and assign it
to an outside force we can't see. God,in this case.

God has gotten much smaller in the last 3000 years.
When we had no science, and understood nothing
of how the universe worked, god was was given
credit/blame for everything. Now he's just given
credit/blame for a few things.

Quote: scire

Coherent - I hope!

Sorry, not even clsoe.

Look, I didn't ask you to pronounce deoxyribonucleic acid. I said I've no idea what you think it is. I still don't have any idea. Cells don't function because they have DNA, it's not cell "fuel" as it were. That's another molecule with a scary name: adenosine triphosphate (ATP).

And I've no idea what you'r trying to say, aside from the fact that apparently science doesn't know everything.

Fortunately for you I can predict the exact date when science will know everything there is to know: Never.

Now, how does that prove anything, other than the fact that science does not know everything?

On second thought, forget I asked.

I think you have the whole concept of faith backwards. Living a life of faith is not really a crutch like you portray it here. It is living having faith there are things out there bigger than yourself, things more powerful than you and things you do not have the ability to control. Living a life of faith is a life of humility, it is a life of sacrificing yourself for your fellow man.
But you kind of illustrated my point for me, perhaps without even realizing it. People who are not of faith will not have faith without some scientific proof. With proof there is no faith to be had, as you can see it and feel it and it is very tangible. Perhaps faith is not rational and I would even say that most believers feel that way. I don't look at the Bible as a historical document meant to view as a timeline throughout the history of mankind, I view it as a handbook on how to live life as a good human being.

Believing patterns happen in randomness is one of the great follys of gamblers and theists, and is the big money maker for casinos and religious institutions.

" Perhaps faith is not rational"

Change that perhaps with definitely and you will have a lot more converts !

Quote: MauiSunset

.... don't forget all those virgins too.

Actually, they're raisins!

Quote: Gabes22

I think you have the whole concept of faith backwards. Living a life of faith ... is living [believing that] there are things out there bigger than yourself, things more powerful than you and things you do not have the ability to control. Living a life of faith is a life of humility, it is a life of sacrificing yourself for your fellow man.

Quote: Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.

What is the greater moral legitimacy of sacrificing yourself for your fellow man than of sacrificing your fellow man for yourself? What if faith allows us to do neither, believing that a fair and equitable contract (agreement between self-respecting individuals of like mind) is possible? What, in your (rather non-biblical) definition of "faith", is the moral value of a mutually beneficial trade agreement?

Mankind is apparently unique among the animals in his ability to form abstract (spiritual) models which describe reality, on any scale, from the tiny atom to the galactic cluster, through the use of numbers and scale by which to (miraculously?) convert all things to a size fit for man and thus making man the conqueror of his universe, eventually. Man is able to scrutinize and dismember difficulties (Greek analysis, "a breaking down into pieces") and design a foil by which to circumscribe and contain them using Reason. This is the faith I have, "the substance of things hoped for (the good future) and the evidence of things not seen (the good future)", that man will conquer via the Holy Spirit (the voice of Reason within)! This is God's will!

Quote: aceofspades

Babelfish - sounds yummy! Fried with a side of potatoes

Babelfish? I'm speechless. (LOL)

I was visited by two of Jehovah's Witnesses last week. I nearly had them recruited to team Atheist before they left in a huff.

Quote: s2dbaker

I was visited by two of Jehovah's Witnesses last week. I nearly had them recruited to team Atheist before they left in a huff.

This story is actually encouraging.

Quote: s2dbaker

I was visited by two of Jehovah's Witnesses last week.

Jehovah's Witnesses make for a good emergency
food supply in a world emergency. Humanity
doesn't really need for that line to continue..

Quote: NowTheSerpent

Mankind is apparently unique among the animals in his ability to form abstract (spiritual) models which describe reality, on any scale, from the tiny atom to the galactic cluster, through the use of numbers and scale by which to (miraculously?) convert all things to a size fit for man and thus making man the conqueror of his universe, eventually.

Although I agree with the ability of abstract thinking, actually the human mind has no ability to perceive the scale ot atoms and galactic clusters.

How many peas fit into an (empty) bottle of wine ? I would first guess about 10,000 without help of any abstract concept. That guess can be checked either by some number manipulation (maybe 10 peas per mm³, with 1000mm³ volume) or even experiment (just count them all the evening).
That scale seems fine for the human mind.

But, how many atoms fit into a single pea ? Honestly, no idea. A first guess out of the blue ? I'm sure it will easily be off by several orders of magnitude. Of course you can calculate the answer, but even then the number won't tell you anything - it's just a big number without any grasp of how big it is.

Same with galactic dimensions. From physical travelling experience one might get a rough idea at how large the earth is. But how many earths do you need to fill a typical galaxy ? How many galaxies to fill the gap between a galaxy cluster ?. It's just another big number, maybe a big big number or even a big big bada number. Of course we can calculate....

From all of those questions above, I'm pretty sure we have no real idea about any other scale than our primitive everyday scale. I'm also sure human mankind has no real grasp of mathematics. Well of course the mathematics we use is real, but given the history of mathematics it's a really slow process....



No, I won't say the human is *the* animal who has mastered abstraction.

If people will buy the Big bang explosion ( first there was nothing, then it expoded ) , surely believe in an invisible, all knowing God
makes perfect sense.

Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man, living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of your life. And he has a list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any, any, of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire and smoke and ash and torture where he will send you to suffere and burn and scream and cry forever and ever until the end of time!

...but he loves you.

He loves you and he needs money!

-George Carlin

HEY MISSION I quoted this time, OK ?

Evolution is a great description of creation. Unfortunately, most people fail to see the connection. In my opinion our universe was clearly engineered.

Quote: NowTheSerpent

Mankind is apparently unique among the animals in his ability to form abstract (spiritual) models which describe reality,

Animals think in a linear fashion, a straight line.
They can't make deductions based on their thinking,
but they can be taught how to react. Humans can
look at many sides of a situation, and consider
each one seperately. I can show my really smart dog
how to turn on the TV with the remote as many
times as I want, he'll never get it. Show it to a two
year old kid and they get it almost immediately. Animals
can't grasp cause and effect.

If you hit a dog with a broom, he'll be mad at the broom.
It'll take him a long time to make the connection that
you have something to do with it.

That's simply not true, some animals CAN grasp cause and effect. FYI crows are a good example.

I also believe that it's only a matter of time before we develop machines that will also become "self aware" enabling life to fill the machine.

Thanks for straightening that out for me Bob. I been hitting the kid with the broom. And the dog keeps running that Green Bay replay on the TV. Stupid dog. Even a dumb animal should know SEATTLE won fair and square.

Quote: Keyser

That's simply not true, some animals CAN grasp cause and effect.

That didn't take long. I thought it would be Weasleman
or Wongbo. Generally speaking animals can't. But there
are exceptions. A really smart dog will connect twisting
the knob opens the door, and do it on his own without
being taught. Arnold the pig could turn the channel on
the TV in Green Acres and liked to wear sunglasses.

Here's a good example. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/09/19/crows-understand-cause-and-effect-even-when-the-cause-is-hidden/

Quote: Keyser

Here's a good example.

Here's a better one:

You should address him as Arnold Ziffel.

Fred and Doris consider that an insult.

You are close to being suspended AGAIN !

Quote: Keyser

Evolution is a great description of creation. Unfortunately, most people fail to see the connection. In my opinion our universe was clearly engineered.

The only reason for a Creator is speed. With our intelligence, we all can take a shuffled deck of cards, sort out a Royal Flush from the other 47, and lay it on the table in a short period of time.

However, we can get the same Royal Flush from thousands of shuffled decks eventually, randomly.

The Universe has the quality of lots of matter, some basic properties and billions of years to randomly come up with a few interesting things here and there in the incredible vastness.

All will be revealed when the ALIENS take over Earth.

Quote: EvenBob

That didn't take long. I thought it would be Weasleman
or Wongbo. Generally speaking animals can't. But there
are exceptions. A really smart dog will connect twisting
the knob opens the door, and do it on his own without
being taught. Arnold the pig could turn the channel on
the TV in Green Acres and liked to wear sunglasses.

Arnold Ziffel is running for President in 2012

ARNOLD ZIFFEL IS THE BEST PIG FOR THE JOB

LOOK AT THE OTHER CHOICES

ARE THERE ANY OTHER CHOICES ?

Quote: rxwine

The only reason for a Creator is speed. With our intelligence, we all can take a shuffled deck of cards, sort out a Royal Flush from the other 47, and lay it on the table in a short period of time.

However, we can get the same Royal Flush from thousands of shuffled decks eventually, randomly.

The Universe has the quality of lots of matter, some basic properties and billions of years to randomly come up with a few interesting things here and there in the incredible vastness.

This is called the "inverse gambler's fallacy."

If you have half a million freshly shuffled decks, and deal five cards from each, chances are better than even that one of them will be a royal flush. If you have one, the chance is tiny. However, if you see someone deal five cards from a freshly shuffled deck, and they form a royal flush - how many decks are being dealt from? The royal flush tells you nothing.

The only reason for a creator is if we were somehow preordained, if it were some massive coincidence that we came to exist. It isn't. Although the chances of the universe having intelligent life are an open question, there's no reason our configuration is less likely than any given configuration without intelligent life. The only reason there would be to argue from probability would be if there were some nonzero prior probability of an intelligence, like the ones down here, running the universe in every detail. However, the probability of that is infinitesimal - and infinitesimal does not mean very small, but, without some infinite multiplicand, zero.

Quote: MangoJ

Actually the human mind has no ability to perceive the scale ot atoms and galactic clusters.

I didn't say "perceive"; I said "describe".

Quote: MangoJ

But, how many atoms fit into a single pea ? Honestly, no idea

Ever hear of Angstroms? They're used (everyday, actually) to objectively measure atomic and molecular bond lengths in terms of familiar-size numbers.
There's nothing left to your question, and a porpoise couldn't even form such a question.

Quote: MangoJ

I'm also sure human mankind has no real grasp of mathematics. Well of course the mathematics we use is real, but given the history of mathematics it's a really slow process....

Then there'd be zero mathematicians, and the slowness of the process still puts us far ahead of the pig and the wolf.

Quote: MangoJ

No, I won't say the human is *the* animal who has mastered abstraction.

I will, and if you can't see the importance of the difference of natures between how the best human minds create and how other animals subsist, this point has been a waste of time.

No other animal has developed culinary arts, sewer systems, newspapers, shirts, marriage, court systems, transportation machines, or the Freedom Tower. And they don't look like they're suddenly about to.

Quote: EvenBob

That didn't take long. I thought it would be Weasleman
or Wongbo. Generally speaking animals can't. But there
are exceptions. A really smart dog will connect twisting
the knob opens the door, and do it on his own without
being taught. Arnold the pig could turn the channel on
the TV in Green Acres and liked to wear sunglasses.

Lots of animals understand cause and effect, watch this bird use trial and error to solve the problem.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00p0116

Quote: NowTheSerpent

No other animal has developed culinary arts, sewer systems, newspapers, shirts, marriage, court systems, transportation machines, or the Freedom Tower. And they don't look like they're suddenly about to.

And what makes any one those intrinsically great? You can't judge human versus animal input in the world through subjective human eyes. Besides many of the things you mentioned were invented to solve certain problem which animals just solve in another way.