Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Similarities....

Ants and Scientists:

Are obsessively curious.
Are specialized.
Do not recognize human emotions.
Go out on field trips to explore new territory and find new things.
Chemically analyze everything they find.
Share knowledge amongst themselves.
Which they communicate back to a centralized source.

Ants and Humans

Are omnivores.
Wage war upon their own kind.
Live in packed masses.
Each individual has a specific job to do.

Immigrate to other areas
Live in colonies, and have colonized most of the earth
Obey hierarchal authority blindly
Go on forced marches destroying everything in their path:
Like Sherman?s march through Georgia. Like the 2nd WW. Like Rome?s armies destroying everything in their path.

Can you think of anything else?

Turak wrote:
"Ants and Scientists: Do not recognize human emotions."

and asks:

"Can you think of anything else?"

I can think that you are incorrect. According to your first sentence psychotherapy and psychotherapeutic drugs don't exist.

And precisely what is the source of the information from which you have concluded that ants don't have emotions. They may ... they may not ... but in truth you just made this up.

You obviously are being silly and very unscientific.

Human emotion comes from a complex interaction of hormones, mental processes, social relationships, mixed with civilized culture, abstract concepts, mammal-needs of nurturing, etc...

Ants are insects. They evolved WAY BACK... before complex human emotions ever existed. Hell: even the closest mammal related to us: the chimpanzee is not as emotionally expressive as we are.

second: Drugs are made for profit. They are not made because corporations have human emotions...

Where do you get your logic from?

turak wrote:
"You obviously are being silly and very unscientific."

Actually no. I am being intellectually honest and using critical thinking.

turak wrote:
"Human emotion comes from a complex interaction of hormones, mental processes, social relationships, mixed with civilized culture, abstract concepts, mammal-needs of nurturing, etc..."

Duh!

turak wrote:
"Ants are insects."

Duh!

turak wrote:
"They evolved WAY BACK"

Duh!

turak wrote:
"before complex human emotions ever existed."

Are you claiming that ants stopped evolving 1,000,000 years ago and have been somehow exempted from the rest of biology ever since? If so provide a shred of evidence to support your conjecture.

turak wrote:
"even the closest mammal related to us: the chimpanzee is not as emotionally expressive as we are"

And how many chimpanzees have answered that question so you could see whether you presumption is human bias?

turak asks:
"Where do you get your logic from?"

At least I have some. What you wrote is worthless and based upon personal opinion not supported by a single study by anyone published anywhere.

And you did a really pathetic job of trying to change the subject so let me drag you back again.

You originally wrote:
"Ants and Scientists: Do not recognize human emotions."

And I challenged you. So far you have produced no evidence that ants don't have emotions. No evidence that scientists don't have emotions (I for one have a slightly emotional reaction to people such as you proving you are wrong). And your nonsense, above, does not point to a single study that even pretends to support your personal opinion.

I see.. You claim that ANTS!! Have evolved over the past million years; so they are diffarent now than when they were 1 million years ago? Er... where do you get your um... study! from, that has been er... PUBLISHED! By somebody else!? That scientifically proves this, eh?

OH!!! Since this is merely a fanciful suppostion? Dream? Fantasy? Claim? CONJECTURE; by you, with NO scientific data or proof to back it up... then why it is... SCIENTIFIC?

What pure balderdash. You know perfectly well that the fossil remains of ants have been found all over the world... and that the fossils are exactly as they are now. Ants have not evolved or changed. You know this, so why are you throwing this red herring out?

Another idiotic unscientific red herring: the idea of being able to speak to chimpanzees and find out if they have humnan emotions... How STUPID are you? Chimpanzees have different brainwaves and different brain functions from us.

Do you want to wait a few million years until they evolve into human beings to ask them if they had any human emotions a million years ago?

Why don't you ask yourself if you have the emotiions of a chimpanzee? That study would be MUCH easier to do.

BUT!! You PROUDLY adit to having NO human emotions... since YOU are.. er... totally non-scientific as to your fantasy lie that ants have evolved to, to,,, HAVE HUMAN EMOTIONS!!

My, my.... what rot. And they let you get away with this? GOD are you unscientific.

In case you do not know... which you obviously do not. Evolution is NOT... I repeat NOT a function of time. MAny species have been found to have existed for millions of years without evolving in any way whatsoever. Evolution happens as gateway occurences, as you should know by now. Species go for hundreds, thousands even millions of years without changing at all.

Evividence? SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?

ANT sensory apparatus is CHEMICAL BASED. They do not have ANY of the sensory appendages or sensory processing functions we do, They do not even have a BRAIN... which is NEEDED to process the human senses to produce human emotions...

You want scientific STUDIES shown here that ants do not have human emotions?

Go to your nearest researcg laboratory and see if they will oblige you... er, as they show you the door and laugh their heads off.

YOU??? Scientific? Utter rot. Not one thing you have posted here is scientific.

Basically: you are very proud of being almost as intelligent as an ant. You are also bery proud of not having any human emotions. But you do not like the scientific facts that prove you are basically no different from an ant. This bothers you because you DO have one human emotion. It is called by many names: Hubris, Arrogance, Pride. Which forces you to respond illogically and unscientifically to scientific facts.

Your attmpt to sluff me off as non-scientific is nothing but pure bluster.

You try any of your arrogance with me and I will expose you for the faker you are: Mr. Morgan.

And furthermore...

Don't you EVER try to tell me that scientific facts are nothing but my personal opinion you liar.

There are TONS of scientiific facts and studies that prove what I have written here.

Yet YOU, you hypocrite spout your personal idiotic fantasies and magically do not NEED to support your irrationasl claims with aNY scientific studies?

What a two-faced hypocrite you are.

You want me to show you the studies? I WILL.

But first YOU have to SHOW ME the scientific studies that prove your inane notions about chimpanzees and ants having human emotions. And your scientific LIE that ants have evolved over the last 1 million years.

Turak wrote:
"You claim that ANTS!! Have evolved over the past million years; so they are diffarent now than when they were 1 million years ago?"

Yes. And there is a huge amount of genetic research that supports that proposition. For one thing there aren't any 1,000,000 year old ants on the planet.

Turak wrote:
"What pure balderdash. You know perfectly well that the fossil remains of ants have been found all over the world... and that the fossils are exactly as they are now."

No I don't know that and I have good reason to believe it isn't true. However since you didn't post any links everyone else reading this will be equally inclined to disbelieve you. I know how to use google ... do you?

Turak wrote:
"Don't you EVER try to tell me that scientific facts are nothing but my personal opinion you liar."

I didn't. I said that you were expressing personal opinion NOT scientific facts. And again since you are seemingly incapable of using a search engine we have no evidence to the contrary. Just your invective which may reasonable be interpreted as meaning that I am correct.

1,00,000 year-old ants? Where did you get THAT red herring from, eh?

I was referring to FOSSILS. trying to change the subject again eh?

You say that there are no remains of fossilized ants 1,000,000 years old? Be ready to eat yout words.

You 'have every reason to believe' that ants have evolved genetically over the last 1,00,000 years? Be ready to EAT those words.

As is very evident... I am painting you into a corner of your own lies. EVERY OTHER STATEMENT I posted you cannot contest or show scientific evidence to the contrary... so you leave ALL of my other stements alone. Proving that I am scientifically correct on ALL of them.

The only LAST rermaining lies you are trying to keep, to save your face and your pompous attitude on this forum: are these two red herrings... which I will FIND the data and prove that you are wrong... so you will EAT every word you posted as a FAKE unscientific.

Science is based upon factual evidence. You HAVE none to support your claims except 'reason to believe' and your IMAGINARY genetic research thsat is supposed tosupport your claim.. Well: MR. put-up or shut-up... either SHOW your genetic evidence or SHUT YOUR MOUTH about it

Easy Trigger. You don't think ants are subject to evolution? You think there are no new species of ants that have evolved over the last million years?

No doubt that the basic design of ants came into being many millions of years ago (something like 140,000,000 years ago, from what I've read). But there are nearly 12,000 known species of ants in the world today. They didn't all pop up at once.
(see: http://antbase.org/ )

Can you show that ancient ant species are still in existence today?

Turak wrote:
"I was referring to FOSSILS. trying to change the subject again eh?"

Not at all. I was merely pointing out the obvious. Ants have gone through many generations in the last 1,000,000 years. The fact that their superficial external features have not changed is irrelevant. There is no fossil record of whether an animal has emotions which you seem to have forgotten was your original premise.

Turak wrote:
"I am painting you into a corner of your own lies."

Where? I don't see any and you still haven't posted a single link supporting the claim that ants and scientists don't have emotions. I presume because you can't find any.

Turak wrote:
"Science is based upon factual evidence."

Exactly. So where is your evidence that ants don't have emotions?

Where is your evidence that scientists don't have emotions?

And you've the nerve to call me a liar? Fascinating.

soilguy asks:
"Can you show that ancient ant species are still in existence today?"

His original statement was that ants and scientists have no emotions. He is running away from that statement as fast as he can without the integrity to acknowledge he was incorrect.

Where is the evidence that ants don't have emotions?
Where is the evidence that scientists don't have emotions?
That what this needs to revolve around.

All the anger and name calling is just his way of dealing with getting caught.

So you people actually believe that ants have human emotions? Pardon me while I laugh my head off.

You don't mind If I show your posts on other science forums do you? I'm sure they will get a kick out of it.

Where is your scientific proof?

If it is during the day... look out your window. Does the sun actually exist? Can you show me one scientific study done that proves the sun actually exists?

Where are all the usual reams of scientific evidence you are used to confusing people with? You present your misinformstion to them but not to me... why IS that?

Why are you such a two-faced hypocrite? You expect people to show you scientific studies done and proved. If not: you will not believe the sun exists ot that ants have no human emotions...

BUT... you NEVER show YOUR scientific proofs for your claims EVER. That is because you are a fake. Your opinions are not scientific to say the least. Your idea of ants having human emotions is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard of.

But do go on about it! I would love to see your scientific proof.

WHAT??? What's that? You mean you HAVE no proof?


OHHHHH! So THAT'S is why you are trying to avoid the readers SEEING you not presenting any scientific evidence to substantiate your claims.

Every single statement I have made... NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF TO THE CONTRARY..... Why is that? Why can't you prove I am wrong?

You see little boy: it is up to YOU to prove my statement is wrong. Not me. I am not so stupid as to believe ants have human emotions... But since you do.... How come you are not showing any scientific proof of this?

And WHERE did you get this scientific LIE that since there are many sub-species of ants in the world... er... that they MUST have evolved over a million years... Why can't you find any scientiific studies that show this; EH??

You are complete two-faced liar and hypocrite. You show no scientific evidence to prove your crazy idea. You show no logic. You do not do your research. You are not even sure how long ants have been on this earth.

Yet you act as if you are GOD, You act as if your idiotic imaginary claims are pronouncements of truth; when they are complete lies.

Show me one scientist who shares your, er... um... view that ants have human emotions.... PLEASE...

Because if you cannot do that: you will be confessing that you are the only person in the world who has this weird idea.

Ants having human emotions...

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!

You've been watching too many Disney movies.

actually, no one said they have human emotions, just that they might have emotions. big difference there. the thing is, where is the proof they dont have any.

oh, and da, when you answer the part about studies proving the suns existance, theres no need to use more than a hundred. im sure he'll get the picture.

Turak wrote:
"So you people actually believe that ants have human emotions? Pardon me while I laugh my head off."

I didn't say I believed it. I also didn't say I didn't believe it. I asked you for any evidence to support your statement.

You have none. Thus the joke is on you.

Wrong. There is no such thing as a non-human emotion. The only emotions humans are able to recognize are their own.

Poor little ego: doesn't like to be laughed at.

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!

I suppose you also REFUSE to believe that the sun exists also... since you like to, er... scientifically doubt everything.

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!

You are funny.

Obviously you have never been around animals much. Ive been around dogs, cats horses and a few other animals. i can tell you animals have emotions. Any human that cant recongize that is to selfcentered for their own good. How far down that goes is a scientific question that i dont believe anyone has ever attempted to answer. (that part is of course just MHO) Do ants have emotions? im afraid im the wrong person to ask, as ive never studyed long enough too even consider that question. I would not say yes or no without having to see some proof one way or another.

Turak is male, caucasian, 18 years old, lives in Wheeling West Virginia, and has never had a girlfriend.

He is using SAGG as a forum to pretend he is an adult.

I'd think it would be a huge improvement if he acted his age.

Posting personal data is not appropriate for this forum. Please refrain from doing so in future.

Amaranth

Sorry Rose but I just made it up.

I have as much a clue as to who is here as you do. Well actually a lot less.

Won't do it again in any case.