Sentences with phrase «human species do»

I think this is more just the fact that the human species doesn't intuitively deal with «scale» when we get to very large numbers and bodies... finds it confusing, counter-intuitive.

The human species doesn't respond to long - term risks particularly well.

Not exact matches

Marsh calls it, «an eye - opening exploration into how children are raised around the world and how child - rearing can inform the understanding of human nature more broadly,» noting the author's most essential point is that «one of the things which makes humans special as a species is that we don't limit care to our own children.

Species commonly found in humans: Clostridium perfringens (potential pathogen), Clostridium difficile (potential pathogen), Clostridium tetani (potential pathogen; is only transiently associated with humans, does not colonize the intestines).

What it does: This bacteria is most notorious for causing severe illnesses such as tuberculosis, leprosy, and Hansen's disease, though most species of mycobacteria in nature are benign in humans, unless in cases of those who have weakened immune systems.

Atheists aren't innocent either: eugenics, the belief that certain races do not deserve to live because they could hinder the evolution of the human species.

Technophobe,: Christians, Muslims and Jews do believe in micro-evolution (the evolution inside species) but none of these religions believe in evolutionist macro evolution, the evolution of organisms changing species (ie, fish turning into reptiles, then turning to humans)

So in that spirit, you can start realizing that it is the human species which will go on, if it doesn't become too self - destructive.

I don't have to use my imagination to know that we have endless evidence showing the evolution of many types of species, including humans.

So we Christians do not oppose nuclear weapons because they threaten to destroy «mother earth,» but because the God we serve would not have one life unjustly taken even if such a killing would insure the survival of the human species.

It does not belong in public and is detrimental to the progress of the human species.

But presuming — as I do — the validity of the concept of geologic time, I note that the designation «Anthropocene» unavoidably suggests an exceptional quality to the species homo sapiens, if only in terms of our collective human powers.

I believe that throughout most of our early human history, when our species population was still relatively small, you simply didn't see rampant homosexuality.

The fact that humans do not have a limited «mating season» tied to the fertility of the female should be a tip off that our species is somewhat unique in this department.

everything is made up of atoms (don't believe me do some research) its the different variables of heat and light and things like that that cause different reactions to make different things and these things when they interact can create something completely different and you and slowly the process of mitosis or miosis starts to work and form stuff hell i learnt that in high school and it was a catholic one at that a millions of years ago i bet the universe was completely different and had things in it that our minds cant even imagine that have since changed over time from action and reaction to what we have today and in another million years who knows with all the different gases we pump into the air and the weather getting more intense on both ends of the scale life as we know it will be different the human race will have to evolve to survive and will probibly form into a slightly different species hell maybe well evolve into 2 different species like in the movie time machine

If so, how do we balance the rights and needs of human beings against those of other species.

We share the sense that human beings are immersed in the natural world and do constitute one species among others.

She doesn't have the least interest in our god - given human hunger for meaning and transcendent values all Mother Nature cares about is the survival of the species which requires getting the DNA from one generation to the next and providing for the young until they are self - sufficient enough to sustain their own lives and we are the venue.

That makes our species feel better about ourselves, and we hope that when we are the ones going through the tragedy that our fellow humans will do the same for us.

Less shallow because it recognizes at least that the individual is not master of his fate and can not live for himself alone, but still shallow in supposing that the human group — class, race or species — can do so.

Applying Dedalus's remark to biology, one can ask: What ensures that the human species will not someday be one of the «thousand types» for which nature does not care, which will perish in a global holocaust of the type that befell the dinosaurs?

And having produced the human species, the struggle for further complexity did not suddenly cease.

And human beings are the only species capable of self - determination; we do not function solely out of instinct.

As reason sets human beings apart from all other animals, it seems that our rational nature can not be explained by evolution alone, for we do not find stages of lesser reflective selfconsciousness before the human species but evolution requires only gradual changes at a time.

That's why I think we really need to step up the incentives to use more reliable methods that don't count on humans to be too reliable... we just aren't as a species.

if humans had just fell in line with religious teachings and never asked questions other than «god did it»... then people would still be dying in child birth, the common cold, small poxs etc etc etc. i find that we survived a s a species to become the alpha predator of this planet and the achievements we have made since then to be amazing; attributing everything humans have achieved to a god just cheapens the value of our achievements as a species.

Thinking or knowing, as distinguishing the human species from the lower creatures, is symbolic as applied to God, who neither knows as we do nor fails to know as the lower creatures do.

One would think humans would have moved forward by now but instead we as a species behave in the same self - destructive manner now as we did thousands of years ago with more at stake then at any other time in history.

The perception that Christians don't care about pollution, species extinction, and the social and human health consequences of land degradation can ultimately drive people away from Christ.

Adolf was also preaching that all others who did not fit into his idea of «perfect human» should be penned up as a lesser species.

So a chimp didn't evolve into a human, rather an earlier form diverged to form both species.

Has nothing to do with actual fossils that demonstrate an evolution of a single species over time; whether dogs, cats, monkeys, birds, or humans.

That one set of human beings could do this to another set condemns our whole species.

If we do not attribute any special status to the human race, then the goal should be for it to diminish in size to the point where the planet can support it alongside other species without discrimination.

I doubt we can agree on God but can we agree humans did not evolve from any current species?

This doesn't mean that we're physically prepared for some cataclysmic event in terms of having a well - stocked fallout shelter, but rather that we enjoy the mental exercise of imagining the imminent peril and possible means of survival for humans as a species.

And quite apart from humans, nature itself, we believe, has produced new species of plants and animals, new environments, and other important new facts.15 To interpret this use of the word «creativity»» from the standpoint of our metaphysics, we may claim that the production of such novelty» has to do exclusively (with the exception to be discussed below) with characterization.

It was probably not until the axial age, when the Israelites began to experience mystery more explicitly in the mode of future and promise, that humans began first to realize that we do not dwell in nature with the same instinctive ease that other species do.

In his last book The Fragile Species, biologist Lewis Thomas wrote that if the human species is to survive, human beings must learn to do three things and to do them well: to connect; to communicate; and to cooSpecies, biologist Lewis Thomas wrote that if the human species is to survive, human beings must learn to do three things and to do them well: to connect; to communicate; and to coospecies is to survive, human beings must learn to do three things and to do them well: to connect; to communicate; and to cooperate.

Certainly consciousness does not exist at the level of atoms and electrons, nor does reflective self - awareness seem to appear in evolution until the human species comes onto the scene.

I can go on and on about the attributes of other living species acting the same way humans do, so why do people believe they haven't a soul?

One would submit that bird - song and bee - dance fit with the natural, physical purposes of those species, whereas human language and artefacts which have sophisticated goals and meanings within human culture do not.

You can do so much better than to resort to such stock canards as «If humans evolved from monkeys when you know full well what the theory of evolution says regarding the multiple species of primates.

I do believe in the fellowship of humans as a species, that I believe are worth continuing in existence.

No we do not know every species, but we have not and will not ever find one that has a chamber inside of it that could allow a human to survive for days within.

why don't you start with why humans invented religion in the first place, the origins of the books of the bible, the multiple «christ» (copied) stories throughout the history of time, fossil evidence of evolution of man and all species, all the discrepancies in the bible, knowledge of all the gods that humans have believed in through recorded history, the political uses of christianity in the time of it's origin, the fact that every other religion has followers who believe just as strongly in their own god / book, that fact that if you had been born in another part of the world you would be a different religion and going to «hell», and that a good, kind, omniscient god wouldn't allow all the suffering and evil to happen, and wouldn't need «help» as christians like to tout... and then we'll get to all these ridiculous fools.

Also, because human beings are such a profoundly social species, when we don't have meaningful relationships, we feel sub-human, and that, in turn, exacerbates our shame.

Guess procreating, laboring, & delivering wasnt at all what my body was designed for... how ever did humans become the dominate species of the world?!

Meanwhile, what we do know is that human beings exhibit the characteristics of continual feeders, and it's a sure bet that relatively frequent, «on demand» feedings have been the historic and evolutionary norm for our species.

Wow did she ever stop to wonder how humans as a species have survived for so long on breastfeeding alone?