Intelligence Design

Like the straightforward definition of intelligence design, I think that it is a middle ground for both creationism and evolution. Intelligence design supports the belief that our evolution is by the cause of a higher power. I can understand why people say intelligence design is not a science. The theory derives the majority of its ideas from a religious point of view. In my opinion, intelligence science can be called science. Science is knowledge based on a systematic study, so technically intelligence design because its supporters do perform research.

Intelligent Design

I believe intelligent design should not be taught in science classes. It should not be considered a science because there is no scientific evidence what so ever to back up intelligent design. Although just a theory, evolution has scientific relevance and should be taught in science classes. I believe students should be aware and know the differences in the beliefs such as creationism, intelligent design, and evolution. But that should be saved for a class like Survey to discuss the debate and to provide awareness for students.

Intelligent Design

I believe we need to teach the scientific form of evolution mainly in school science classes. It is the only theory that has scientific backing to it. Creationism and intelligent design don't have enough backing at all to make them scientific. We need to inform people about their values, but teach that the only one of these theories that has any scientific relevance is evolution / real eve.

Intelligent Design

In my opinion, intelligent design should not be considered a form of science. And that it is fair not calling it a science, because it is simply a belief with no hard evidence to prove anything. If schools want to teach it then they can, it all depends on how the students will understand it. But schools should not teach it as a science.

Intelligent design

I believe that Intelligent design is not science. It promotes the idea of an all-powerful creating force, which has no valid argument as a scientific idea. In fact it has more in common with creationism than science

Intelligent Design

I don't think Intelligent Design is a science personally, mostly because it's just a mixture of both creation and evolution. i feel that it's an excuse for people not to chose between them. But i wouldn't mind if it was taught in public schools, because it allows creation believer to expand their view point.

Intelligent Design

I do not believe Intelligent Design is a science. Although it isnt a science, i do believe it should at least be mentioned when teaching about human origin. Evolution is only a theory, it is not 100% proven yet they are still allowed to teach it in school. They should be giving us options on what we want to believe instead of just explaining one to us. I dont think they need to go into great detail about ID, but i definitely think it should be mentioned or talked about.

Intelligent Design

Even though I wouldn't consider intelligent design a science, it is still another belief to the creation of humans. Even though evolution has scientific proof, their are still parts of it that scientists are unable to explain. Teaching both will help students understand the differences between the two and help them decide which one they agree with and support. So even though I wouldn't consider it a science, it does have its own valid points, and it is a well supported belief world wide.

Intelligent Design

i think that ID is just a smart way of religion to make its way into the school boards teachings,
if there were more fact then about this then maybe yes it could be a alternative teaching then evolution. Evolution is a proven to be a science and until ID can do the same it should stay in private schools.

Intelligent Design

Science is defined as, "a branch or knowledge of study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws." With that in mind, no, I do not think intelligent design should be considered a science. I think it's great that it can bring together the developmental side of evolution and the birthing of humans as many religions pronounce. Intelligent design is essentially the belief that humans developed through evolution but were created by a higher power or deity. It is a reasonable explanation for someone who is a scientific religious person, but it is not fact. It is not truth. It's a belief, one of which anyone is entitled to, but should not be considered a science in and of itself.

intelligent design

Intelligent design is simply an idea so I think it is fair to say it is not a science. however, that does not mean it should not be taught in schools. maybe not in science classes but in social science courses. Students should learn about all different theories, then they can make up their mind on the matter.

Intelligent design

I do not think that intelligent design is a science. It is unproven so it isnt really science. Science has proof and evidence such as fossils. Intelligent design should not be taught in school. It is not a science so it would not be mandatory so I doubt many people would take it. If people want to learn about intelligent design then they should just research it themselves.

intellegent design

I think that its fair to say that intellegent design is science. Because when you look at the facts, bottom line there is no solid proof that there was a greater force that created us. Im not trying to offend anyone my going against there beliefs but why is it that we are finding more and more evidence that we evolved from a diiferent form of human. Also when you think about it, are brains are way to complicated for a single think tocreate. The only explanation is that are brains developed over time and until we have proof of a higher power i think that it is fair to say intellegent desing is science

Intelligent Design

I believe Intelligent Design is not a science and I feel the same way about evolution. I also think that if you teach one you have to teach the other. That way the students are not all one sided on the topic. I also think that bringing religion (Intelligent Design) into the picture could have its upsides because then you can allow the students to debate about it and share their own actual beliefs. And by debating it could also lead people to change their beliefs.

intelligent design

Yes it is fair to say intelligent design is not science for a couple of reasons. It doesn't have any good evidence to prove that a higher power had to be involved in making life. Evolution, on the other hand, has lots of evidence to prove that evolution does exist. Also, intelligent design brings religion into account which is not science at all. Bringing religion into a public school will only spark heated debate and disrupt the class.

Intelligent design

Every body has their freedom to their own belifes wether you want to elieve something or not is entirely up to you. On that note if their is scientific evidence to back up a theory such as evolution the school systems will teach it to the students. The ideas of intelligent design however lack the scientific proof that evolution has and is a clear representation of a higher power. To do so would be a very clear violation of our countries seperation between church and state policy. I belive that the requirements for only having to teach evolution. anything else would say that our school systems are teching religion. however schools should be able to give students an understanding of all options includng inteligent design.

intelligent design

Science: a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically

arranged and showing the operation of general laws. science is black and white, data and facts, research and conclusions, support and evidence. in order for intelligent design to be a science there shouldn't be any part of the theory that does not have data to back it up. science should be able to persuade an individual through concrete data, which intelligent design can only use for half its theory.

Intelligent Design

I do not think intelligent design is a science, but then again I don't think evolution is either. Intelligent design has little evidence to defend it's claims. However, if schools teach evolution, which is just a theory, not a law, than they should be able to teach intelligent design. Both proposals have their critics and both have supporters, so clearly neither is 100% agreed with. The reason why schools should teach both is because it is a school's responsibility to give us all the options. Intelligent is not a science because it can't be completely proven, but that does not mean it should not be taught.

Intelligent Design

I don't think it's fair to say intelligent design isn't a science. We hear everyone say, "we don't know enough about it." Therefore, if we don't know the "enough" about it, how can we qualify it as anything at this point? But intelligent design takes faith to believe it and for people who aren't willing to at least consider there being a higher being, then no matter how much evidence were to eventually come to support intelligent design it wouldn't even matter to those who can't take a leap of faith to believe in something greater.

Intelligent Design

I don't think intelligent design should be considered a science because it is an idea. There is no evidence proving that we evolved from one single "intelligent" being. Evolution is backed up scientifically with fossils dating back to millions of years so it has proof that it is a science. I do believe though that everyone is entilted to their own beliefs and intelligent design may be what people choose to believe in and this shouldn't be prevented by any school. I don't think intelligent design should be ignored but I think it would be best to leave it out of any science curriculums in schools and addressed in a social science class instead.

Intelligent Design

Since I heard about intelligent design, I think intelligent design is fair to be said as not science. I think this because intelligent design is only a "concept" that is said as a possible statement. Intelligent design is not science by how it is an idea come up by thought. There is not any science in intelligent design since no cells or scientific theories are implied and stated. Intelligent design shows to be an idea by how it is made to be possible to everyone. I would say intelligent design could be an idea that is able to be applied.

Intelligent Design

I don't think intelligent design is a science. There is no proof backing up the idea of intelligent design, whereas there are many examples of fossils that go back millions of years, backing up the idea of evolution. People should have the right to believe in intelligent design or creationism, but it should not be considered a science. While some people may consider intelligent design a science, it is solely an idea or belief.

Intelligent Design

I think that Intelligent Design is not a science. It is an unproven hypothesis and because of that it shouldn't be taught in schools. Evoulution is a science and has facts to back it up and Intelligent Design doesn't. Also, Intelligent has to do with a higher figure which has to do with religion. Religion can't be taught in public schools.

Fossil Finding

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12286206/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/fossil-discovery-fills-gap-human-evolution/

This article explains the discovery of a 4.2 million year old fossil in northeastern Ethiopia. The new species is called Australopithecus anamensis. Anthropologist Berhane Asfaw made this finding. This fossil helps fill a gap from Australopithecus and Ardipithecus.

Intelligent Design

Intelligent design really isnt science. All it is saying is a higher power atrributed to our complexity. They arent proving much. Sure its saying the evolution happened but they don't have any proof that a higher power created us.

science

School have been debating this for a long time. I believe it could be taught in school depending on hoe it is performed. When going into a sensitive subject like this we need to be cautious that we don't pressure anyone into believing anything they dont want too. Teacher can explain the basis of everything and how it came into play. We can show the facts that we have right now and evidence we have to support it. Like any good experiment we have a hypothesis and then a test trial.

Intelligent design

In my own opinion, school should teach intelligent design, in a limited form that doesnt break the law of church Vs. state law. Teachers should not teach more that they are told to teach. I also believe that teacher should teach this and, let the students choose wat the want to believe or not. For some people they think that evolution was giving by some intelligent form. they believe that god had something to do with human evolution. and they have the right to believe that, but for some other poeple they dont believe it.

Intelligent Design

I think it is fair to say that it is not a science because it is just a bunch of ideas. The ideas are not proven and there is no science to back it up. I dont see a problem with it being taught in school because I think that people can figure out for themselves what to believe.

Intelligent Design

I think that intelligent design should not be considered a science. Intelligent design is mainly just ideas about human origins. This is very closely related to creationism. I don't think schools should be teaching this in schools because it really isn't a science because they are simply ideas or hypothesises not proven.

Intelligent Design

Personally, I believe that intelligent design is not a science because it can not be proven and has not been proven. Intelligent design is simply plausable ideas about how we evolved and became the species we are today. I believe that all of the different theories should be taught in schools. Not just evolution or intelligent design, but creationism also, so that the students can develop and formulate their own opinions and beliefs on this topic.

Intelligent Design

I think that intelligent design should not be considered a science because it's simply an idea. Each person is allowed to believe whatever they want, and that's exactly how things should be with intelligent design. Intelligent design is just another possible view of evolution of human origin. It may be similar to creationism, which is a religious belief, but it's also completely different. I think that it could be considered a science to some people; however, I personally don't consider it to be. This is mostly because there is no evidence to completely support any of these ideas. Therefore, they are all just theories. Because they are only theories, it's not anything that anyone can be 100% positive about. Therefore, it's just an idea which calls for social debate and should be considered a social study.

Intelligent Design

I believe this can go either way. The most important aspect is that it can be interpreted many ways by many different people. I can say it is a science, but then again I go turn the other direction by saying it is not a science. In school, students should be able to take their own sides, which happens in most cases. After all, it is a theory or a hypothesis so no one can be certain. In my mind, science is stuff we learn that has been proven but I can't say that any of these THEORIES are solved yet.

Fossil

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/09/140337459/examining-ancient-fossils-for-clues-to-human-origins

Actually a palentologist's son and his dog found this on accident. The bones have potential to change a lot about what we know of the Human Origins. It is called the Australopithecus sediba because of the holistic body which set them apart. It is dated to be from before when Lucy lived by about a million years. It was a nearly full skeleton, and two of the same species. They aren't yet sure where it fits in the human lineage, they also aren't sure if it fits in the human lineage at all. But if it does it will become a very interesting story.

Intelligent Design

From what i read about Intelligent Design it is basically saying that the universe and all that good stuff was created by some sort of "intelligent" being or god figure. I don't think it is wrong to teach about this theory in schools. However I do think it is wrong for this to be the only view schools take on it, instead of just covering it as one of many theories of the way our universe was created. Even if you don't single out a certain god or being to credit it all to, i think we all have our right to choose. If this becomes the only thing kids are exposed to i think it is equal to sheltering them.

Intelligent Design

In a way, I feel as though it is fair to say that Intelligent Design is not a science. However, in the same way, it is a science because just like all other ideas, it is a hypothesis. Because this idea brings about such a huge debate, I think it's only fair for all ideas of how we were created to be presented in class. If everything is not presented, students can not truly make their own decisions. And that is what school is about - the students.

Quarter 3, Week 4: Intelligent Design

This week we will discuss the legal battle over the teaching of intelligent design as a form of science.  Is it fair to say that intelligent design is NOT science?  Explain your thoughts.

Evolution

Homo Ergaster is definitely the most important. They started using the most advanced tools and started the most organized social system. Before them most homo interaction had been very primitive. They were the first ones to have a real social cycle and an effective way to use their skills.

Fossil Discovery

Java discovered around 1890 by in full Marie Eugène François Thomas Dubois , was the first known fossil of the homo erectus, with his discovery proving Homo erectus walked upright no longer a tree huger species, many argue this was the last link between modern humans and apes.
http://m.eb.com/topic/172783/Eugene-Dubois

Evolution

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110629181853.htm

This article is interesting because it talks about how Homo Erectus at one time co-existed with modern day humans but then as you read on it proves that that theory was false so it was kind of a let down and pointless to read...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0216_050216_omo.html

i think the discovery of these skulls is very important, because it puts the dawn of humans 35000 years earlier. It also adds creditably to the out of Africa theory.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html

The Ardi fossil was found in the Afar desert in Ethiopia. This find was important because... "It shows that the last common ancestor with chimps didn't look like a chimp, or a human, or some funny thing in between."

Fossils

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110908104238.htm

This article is about the discovery of an Australopithecus sediba fossil that was found in South Africa last year. Researchers say that this could be our oldest direct ancestor dating back 1.98 million years. Newly exposed cave sediments in the Malapa Cave where the fossils were found helped to determine how old the Australopithecus sediba were. This discovery is important to the study of evolution because we are still making progress on our ancestors. Just this last year, we found the oldest direct human ancestor, which helps to piece together how we evolved better.

Fossils

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-erectus


This article pretty much explains Homo Erectus and why it was important in our evolutionary time-line. A specific fossil that the article talked about was the
"Turkana Boy", which was a Homo Erectus skeleton that was still very complete and is said to be around 1.6 million years old. This fossil finding was important because they can get a lot of information on their life style and customs from a almost complete skeleton and they could even look at this boys teeth and find out the growth rate for this species and they found it was similar to a great apes rate of growth.

Diggin

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1295624

After 6 years of hunting for fossils, the work paid off. Portions of skulls belonging to people who lived 160,000 years ago were found in Africa. Finding these remains helped support the hypothesis of how people originated from Africa.Berkeley paleontologist Tim White found the fossils in desert sands near the Ethiopian village of Herto. With this discovery we can work on more things having to do with evolution. Soon enough we will have full understanding of how we got here.

Australopithecus sediba Discovery

I read an article by Science Daily, which talked about the discovery of Australopithecus sediba in South Africa last year. The fossil is somewhere around 1.98 million years old, with a 3000 year give-or-take difference. It was discovered by a team of researchers at the Malapa Cave site in South Africa. This is a huge move for the human evolution chart. Dr. Robyn Pickering says, "Knowing the age of the fossils is critical to placing them in our family tree, and this new age means that Australopithecus sediba is the current best candidate for our most distant human ancestor." What do you think will come of this discovery?

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110908104238.htm

The Neanderthal

On May 7, 2010 CNN posted an article about findings of neanderthal bones. These bones belong to three females and they were found in the Vindija Cave in Croatia. Scientists believe that the remains are 38,000 years old. From these findings, scientists have been able to map 60 percent of the genome. This is significant because now scientists are able to compare these findings with ones that are found in humans across the world today.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-07/tech/neanderthal.human.genome_1_neanderthal-genome-neanderthal-dna-humans?_s=PM:TECH

Two Fossils

The geologists and a paleontologist went to find a jawbone of Homo habilis at 1.44 million-years-old in Kenya. This shows how two early humans lived together for half a million years in Africa. Next, they found a 1.55 million-year-old skull of Homo erectus in Kenya. Brown and Gathogo determine the order of volcanic ash layers above and below the fossils which allows scientists to determine the ages of the fossils. Journal Nature described the two fossils. Koobi Fora Research Project discovered the two fossils. Gorillas are in the article. Both are found in 2000 at Ileret region. This is significant because if Homo habilis and Homo erectus lived at the same time, then humans formed from both of them over the years. http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/080607-1.html

Fossils

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/science/09fossils.html?pagewanted=all
The article is about the discovery of fossils of a new species found in a cave in South Africa, known as Australopithecus sediba. Lee Berger, the person who discovered the fossils, says that the species is “the most plausible known ancestor of archaic and modern humans.” Some paleanthropologists disagreee, but if Berger’s claim is accepted, this discovery could change the present version of the human family tree. This is significant because the fossils of Australopithecus sediba could clear up uncertainties regarding exactly when the human lineage emerged.

Fossils Found

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1295624

Fossil hunters in Africa have found the oldest fossilized remains of modern humans. The team was lead by Tim White who is a paleontologist at the University of California, Berkeley. This discovery is important to human evolution because the had a lot of the same facial features of the modern human. It shows that we did indeed evolve from this species because of the many similar facial features that we share.

Connections

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/09/human.fossil.discovery.evidence.new.homo.species

This article is about the discovery of two partial skeletons of Australopithicus Sediba which are over 2 million years old. They were found in South Africa by Dr. James Pickering. This fossils are important becaus they are possibly the best fossils from a transition species. This species is believed to be the transition between our Genus Homo and the Australopithicus genus which was prevuioisly unknown. These findings help full in the gap. These fossils give us great insight to how the Australopithicus transferred into Homo Habilis.

Fossils

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html
This article was about the discovery of the oldest fossil skeleton of the human ancestor. It lived over a million years before "Lucy" and is called the Ardipithecus ramisdus or "Ardi." Ardi's fossil was dicovered in Ethiopia's Afar desert 46 miles from where Lucy's species lived. Ardi shows that the chimpanzee and human link may not be the root of the family tree for human ancestors. Instead Owen Lovejoy who analyzed the bones said, "...there was this vast intermediate stage in our evolution that nobody knew about. It changes everything." Ardi's bone structure infers that she wasn't a bipedal walker like most early hominids, instead her species were bipeds on the ground and quadrapeds in the trees.

Significant Fossil Discovery

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223122209.htm
Scientists dated bones of Homo Sapiens found to about 194,000 years ago, much farther back than the previously found bones at 160,000 years. This means that Homo Sapiens were around for 30,000 more years than we originally thought. It also means that it took early modern humans much longer to start to build culture, since we think cultural things started appearing around 50,000 years ago. This is a significant discovery because we found that humans may have evolved into their present day form much earlier than we had originally thought.

fossils

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/flores.html This article was about the discovery of a type of early human called Homo floresiensis or also know as the Hobbit. This is a species of dwarf human discovered at the Liang Bua cave on the Indonesian island of Flores in 2003. Homo floresiensis was fully bipedal but only about one meter tall. This early human had a very small brain, modern teeth and a receding forehead. They lived in from 38,000 to 18,000 years ago. They made use of stone tools and fire. Scientist believe H. floresiensis is a dwarf relative of homo erectus. This discovery does not change anything from what we already believe in human evolution, but it does show one of the most drastic changes for human adaption ever found.

Fossils

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110908104203.htm

My article was about Darryl de Ruiter and his team naming a new species, Australopithecus sediba, in April 2010. The team found multiple individuals of Australopithecus sediba that show both human like and ape like characteristics intermediate between Australopithecus and present-day humans. The remains were found in South Africa This is significant to the study of human evolution because it may yield new clues to human development and answer key questions of the evolution of the human lineage.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text

. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/10/neanderthals/hall-text
This article is all about the last of the Neanderthals found by Two scientist in the cold parts of Austria. When the officials arrived up there they discovered about 140 bones and it reallly helped us catch a better understanding of neanderthals who are the closest thing to homo sapiens in the evolution chain.

Catarrhine

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=117334

The article is about a new Catarrhine primate fossil. It was found in Saudi Arabia while the University of Michigan and the Saudi Geological Survey were looking for whale fossils. It suggest that the split between Old World monkeys and humans occurred earlier than thought. According to this find, it is estimated that it happened approximately 29 million years ago as opposed to 25-23 million years ago, as previously thought. This discovery also gives researchers an idea of what Old World monkeys may have looked like.

Fossil

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/09/human.fossil.discovery.evidence.new.homo.species

This could be a very important discovery, this article is about this fossil that was found in Africa, near johannesburg. It was ver important and significant that they found the fossil in South Africa, because this will give us more information about the "southern apes". This will also clear out some of the theories of that time. The fossil is about 2 million years old, and its really well perserve.

Fossil

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/science/02fossil.html?pagewanted=all
This article is about the fossil of a Adidipithecus Ramidus. They called this adult female Ardi. She stood around 4 feet tall and weighed 120 lbs. She's 4.4 million years old and is the newest fossil found in africa in 1992. Ardi was built for climbing trees, but was also made to walk on two legs. Ardi is even older than Lucy, another fossil of human evolution.

Fossil Discoveries

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/sep2011/foss-s23.shtml

My article was about a fossil being found in Malapa, South Africa. Scientists believe that this fossil discovery may fill in the gap of human evolution. The fossils seem to come from an adult female and a younger male, possibly a mother and son. They were also said to have been found in a cave from almost two million years ago. The paleoanthropologist that discovered this fossil was named Lee Berger and the name of the type of fossil found is australopithecus sediba. These species lived in Africa in the time that the climate and environment was changing greatly, which is also a larger part of unsolved human evolution. These fossils are thought to possibly be an ancestor of homo erectus. The reason that these fossils are so important is because they are said to be from a less familiar time of human evolution, and they could lead scientists to many more findings about where we have evolved from.

fossils

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/04/100408-fossils-australopithecus-sediba-missing-link-new-species-human/

This article talked about the discovery of what they are calling "Australopithecus Sediba." The researchers are saying that this species may be the missing transitional species that links australopithecines and early humans. Study leader Lee Berger talks about how this skeleton shows combined traits that have never been seen before. The two bodies are guessed to be a 30 year old woman and a 8-13 year old boy. They were found in caves in South Africa. The researchers hope that the Australopithecus sediba will help solve the mystery behind the genus homo.

Significant Fossil Discoveries

In 2006, some fossils including teeth and bones from the hand of the Australopithecus anamensis were found in Northeastern Ethiopia. This helped anthropologists fill in the missing pieces and answer more questions about how our ancestors evolved from one phase to the next. This is significant to the study of human evolution because it is important to understand the different phases of evolution and the more pieces of the puzzle we collect, the better we will be able to fully grasp the concept of how and why the different species did not survive.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12286206/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/fossil-discovery-fills-gap-human-evolution/#.Tz2JblwV3Wg

Fossil Discovery

Archeologists found fossils of fishing hooks made from shell that are 23,000-16,000 years old. They discovered these hooks in Jerimalai Cave at the eastern end of East Timor, North of Australia in 2005. The person to find it was Sue O'Connor from the Australian National University. This is an important find because it shows that early humans were sophisticated enough to catch deep sea fish. Over 39,000 fish bones were also found at the site which support this. Early had more advanced tools than researchers thought.

http://news.discovery.com/history/ancient-human-fishermen-111128.html

Human Evolution

I think the Homo sapiens species was the most diverse and the most intelligent, closest to modern human the fact that they had artwork shows that their imagination where growing ,creativity also evidence of big game hunting which meant they had to feed large brains for the ever evolving growth. Although other types of early humans lived during the same time, we seem to have evolved from the Homo sapiens sapiens since our skulls characteristics like size being 1300 cubic centemetters, thin bone structure , it's seams like in this stage of human evolution we left The tough lifestyle and began thinking our ways out of problems instead of solving them with force alone.

Human Fossil Discovery

In April of 2010, a team of international and Australian scientists discovered two partial skeletons. They were found in a cave deposit near Johannesburg, South Africa. These fossils were said to have "filled the gap of what happened two million years ago in the beginnings of our species". Also, it could tell us where the genus Homo originally came from. They call this species Homo Sediba; they were very well preserved when they were found. As similar to others we've talked about in class, we can date these back which can lead us to deciding where they fit in to our family tree.

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/09/human.fossil.discovery.evidence.new.homo.species

Evolution

I think that Homo Ergaster was the most important. Homo Ergaster was the stage when they had whites in their eyes. Also when their brains started forming. Homo Ergaster where the ones who started fire. Without the whites in our eye or brains then we the world would still be like it was during those eras.

Quarter 3, Week 4: Significant Fossil Discoveries

First, find an article from a credible source that documents a siginificant fossil discovery of early humans.  Then, summarize the content of your article-what was the discovery, where was it, who found it, etc-and explain why it is significant to the study of human evolution.  Include a link to the article you used in your blog post.

Evolution

I think the most important evolutionary stage would be Homo Ergaster. That was when humans first got whites in their eyes, meaning that they could tell each others mood more effectively. The communication between them became more advanced, they could talk to each other. I think thats the most important thing; Communication.

Evolution

I think that homo habilis was the most important stage in human evolution. They were the first to use different things like the stones as tools. This is very important to us now. It shows that they can problem solve and were able to live on and was an important step to coming closer to modern humans today.

I think that our most resent evolutionary change has made the greatest impact. I say this because our most recent change involved immagination. Imagination is the most significant difference between us and other animals. Thanks to this final stage our race has the abillity to learn at a very alarming rate alowing us to dominate all other species. Before this step we were unable to do things such as plan ahead or invent new tools and ideas to drasticly improve technology.

From the knowledge i gained about human evolution through the movie we watched in class, i believe homo ergaster's were the most important step in the human evolution process. Homo ergaster were the first step in the human evolution to effectively communicate with one another, due to the greater whiteness in their eyes which led to non verbal communication. the advancement of communication united the pre-human and made them form a community which allowed for growth and progression. Being able to communicate meant that the homo egasters had a sufficient brain to be intuitive and further understand the world around them.

Evolution

I think Homo Ergaster is the most important evolutionary stage. it is when our brains started to shape into what they are today. it is also the stage that we begin to see the world in a more detailed way. for example they can tell what animal tracks are and how to track animals using the. we also develop language and are able to express ourselves better because of the development of the whites of our eyes.

Evolution

Homo Ergaster was probs the most important one because of their imaginative minds. They were the first ones to notice that animal tracks meant that animals were somewhere near and they were able to recognize that birds flying over head probably meant that their was food somewhere. They also had wider noses to help them breathe a lot better which in turn made their energy level so much greater. The whites of their eyes was another thing that came into play during this era. Overall they were the first to see patterns in the universe. Oh and they also were the first to like discover fire and stuff so they could like see at night and be totally warm.

homo habilis, in my opinion, was the most important step in human evolution. They were the first to use tools to solve their problems. this step is in my opinion the most important step in the formation of the modern human

evolution

I also think that the homo ergasters were the most significant. They could read each other better because of the white that were more visible in their eyes and that helped them communicate better. They also had less body hair which helped them to cool down easier than ape men before them. They could also sweat to cool themselves down. There was less panting as cooling system so that allowed them to start making noises with their mouths and eventually start talking. Bigger brains also helped them cope with their enviornment and allowed them to survive hardships that fame about them.

Human Evolution

I think the most important stage was Ergaster. They were the first to start looking more like humans rather than apes. They were also the first to have white in their eyes which created a new form of communication and emotion. That alone helped them become more like modern day humans.

evolution

i thought that the Homo ergaster was for sure the mot important phase. When they discovered that they could use fire to stay safe at night and give them more time was a huge step. By giving themselves more time during the day not only could they find more down time to eat but also relax and bond with eachother and expand are imagination. Befor then it was all try to stay alive the mornings were all about finding food and surving and at night they couldnt get around because it was pitch dark so they couldnt just walk around.

Evolution

I think the most important stage in Human evolution was Homo Egastur. That stage is when the leap was made to more of a modern Human. They bigger noses so they could breathe through them allowing them to make noises to communicate. They also began to sweat in order to regulate body temp, so they could do more things when it was hot out. The biggest attribute that Homo Egastur brought to the table was their large brain. Their brain allowed them to infer from clues and make connections that no other living thing could. It helped them outsmart bigger, faster, and stronger animals. Although all stage of evolution were important, I think Homk Egastur was the most inportant.

Evolution

I'm gunna have to say that out of the stages i was taught in class, homo egaster was the most important stage in evolution yet. This is the stage where our ancestors brains started becoming close to what we have today. Not only that, but they started having connections to others of their own kind and started building relationships. No other animal could do that before them. Also, having their big brains led them to start leaving their ancesteral grounds and moving other places. This was very important to their survival and we wouldn't be here today if they didn't.

In my opinion, Homo Ergaster was the most important evolution stage. This specific species had many advantages, like a larger/wider nose to keep cool. Not only that, but Homo Ergaster also had a hairless body that made it resemble modern humans, and helped in the process of cooling down. With larger brains, Homo Ergaster was able to track animals down by just using their foot prints. But the most important use of the large brain was to help understand other members of their species. They not only resembled modern humans, but started acting like us as well.

Evolution

I think that the Homo Ergaster were the most significant cavemen mostly because of their ability to sweat. If they weren't able to sweat they would overheat and all die out. They also had large brains which allowed them comprehend a lot more. They had whites in their eyes which helped them in communication.

I think the most significant were homo ergastus. They were the first to have the physical ability to regulate breathing and produce complex sounds. They also were able to make more complex tools than the ones before them-homo habilis.

Homo Ergaster

In my opinion, Homo Ergaster was the most important stage in human evolution. They were the first in our line to be able to sweat, which helped because they could be out in the sun for very long periods of time and not overheat. They could get more done, while other species had to cool down in the shade. Also, since they didn't have to pant to regulate their body temp, it allowed them to start making noises and communicating to each other. One of the most important things was their big brains, which allowed them to make connections between seemingly not connected things.

Evolution

I think the most significant cavemen were the Homo Habilis. The Homo Habilis are the first to make tools. They are quick at scavenging. This can show how active people are today physically. Solving problems shows their intelligence. Homo Habilis has a brain close to a human's mind by solving problems to being comfortable in living.

Evolution

The most important stage in human evolution was Homo Ergaster. They were able to sweat to prevent overheating, instead of panting. Also, they were able to communicate with each other better. The whites of their eyes allowed them to have better nonverbal communication. Communication is the key to a successful species because when we all put our efforts together, we accomplish things more efficiently.

evolution

I think that homo ergaster was the most significant stage in human development. A big help for them was the development of their cooling system. They started sweating in order to preserve oygen, instead of panting. Besause of this, they were able to adjust better to the environment. Another trait of theirs was forming whites in their eyes. This allowed them to have better communication and show emotions more clearly. Lastly, a larger brain helped them track animals and look for weather patterns. Home eraster helped us become who we are today.

Evolution

Although all of the stages of evolution are crucial, I think that Homo Ergaster is the most important stage. Their bodies adjusted to the environment by sweating instead of panting, and the white in their eyes allowed for better communication. A larger brain also allowed Homo Ergaster to see their world different than other species. They could see foot prints and know where an animal was headed, or they could understand what the weather would be like based off of the clouds. These new ways of thinking and interpreting the world around them helped them evolve further, and eventually into the humans we are today.

evolution

I believe that Homo Erectus is the most important stage in the evolution process. They were the first in the Eastern world of Asia and also the first to use fire. Without fire, there was no time to think and plan ahead. This peaceful time allowed them the ability to start having some form of a future and their lives grew beyond the daily necessities. It gave them a sense of safety and security, but also set the plan for generations to come. They were also the first to enter Asia and this is important because they had to adapt to new climates and food sources.

Evolution

I think Homo Egaster was the most influential stage for human development. They learned or adapted to sweating instead of panting to preserve oxygen and function better in their hot environments. This gave us a greater amount of stamina. The whites of the eyes also was a huge advancement in communication. Being able to understand preliminary emotions is huge. I also noticed that in the video they wanted to keep peace within their group when one attacked another. I think this was huge.

Evolution

I believe Homo Ergaster is the most important because their ability to sweat keeps us from panting like dogs, the whites is their eyes has helped us better understand people's emotions, and their large brains are the basis of our knowledge of which we have today.

Evolution

I think the most significant stage of human evolution was Homo Ergaster. Because of their advanced cooling systems and the ability to sweat, they were able to be in the sun longer than the other species in their environment. Also, because they could sweat while working, instead of panting, it allowed them to be able to communicate while moving. Communication is very important for us today and Homo Ergaster helped make it possible. Another important trait we received from them is the whites in our eyes which also helps with communication. Their large brains made them very aware of the environment they lived in, which helped with their survival and allowing us to be here today.

caveman most wanted

Out of all the people that we learned about i think Homo Ergaster is the most significant. WIth the ability to sweat which they developed it helped them survive. Without this feature they would have probably gone extinct in a second due to how headed the earth was. Without sweating they would be panting like dogs. Also they developed bigger brains kind of like ours.These cave people have the development that are needed for survival.

Evolution

I think the most important stage of human evolution was the Homo Ergaster stage. During this stage they developed an advanced cooling system which allowed them to have an advantage over others in their environment. This stage also changed the means of communication because homo ergaster had white to their eyes. Communication is a huge part of our lives today, so we can thank homo ergaster for that! Homo Ergaster also had a very large brain which allowed them to really learn and understand each other. They were also very aware of their environment which gave them the ability to leave Africa.

Homo Ergaster

I think Homo Ergaster was the stage in Evolution that was the most significant because they had the ability to sweat, which was good in the way that they wouldn't blow up if they got over heated. They were starting to resemble more lie humans; less body hair and wider noses. They developed the white in their eyes which allowed them to have more communication with others. Overall, they are very smart and they were very aware of there environment.

evolution

I think that the homo ergaster stage was the most important stage in human evoulution. This is the stage where their brains started becoming close to what we have today. They started developing family and friends. No other animal could do that before them. Also, having their big brains led them to start leaving their ancesteral grounds and moving other places. This was very important to their survival and we wouldn't be here today if they didn't.

Evolution

I think that the most significant stage our evolution was the stage of Homo Ergaster. In the video, they were the first ones that really resembled modern humans appearance wise. Their reduction of hair took them away from the appearance of apes, and made them look more like modern humans. They were also the first ones to have whites in their eyes. This may seem like such a small change from previous stages, but this small change gave them the essential component of what makes us humans. Emotion. One of the key things that make humans different from other creatures is that we are able to portray what we feel to others. By having whites in their eyes, Homo Ergasters were able to communicate what they were feeling to other members.

Evolution

I think the biggest step we took in evolution was moving from homo sapien sapiens to modern humans. We started developing an imagination which helped us in many ways to improve our lives and help us survive. We also had the ability to problem solve which helped us advance farther than our past ancestors. Our big brains gave us the intellectual advantage over the species that came before us.

I think the stage going from homo sapien sapiens to modern humans was the most important, since that was when we started developing modern thinking and the ability to think of inventive ideas. Without this stage we would not be the same that we are today. The cave drawings show exactly what they were thinking at that point, which is a revolution in itself.

Evolution

I think the most segificant stage of human evlution is the Homo Erectus. In my opinion this stage is when the human evolution started to be more human. In this stage they was the first time they figured how to make fire. This helped them to be more secure and safety. This will aslo help them to see at night. In this stage they also made a big evolution, they experiment another continent. Some of them stay in Africa and the otherones migrated to Asia.

Evolution

The most important part of evolution was the Australopithecus Afrensis because this is the stage where they became bipedal. This is important because walking on two feet means they can raise babies, stand taller to see further, and conserve energy. Another substantial step in evolution is the Homo Habilis stage where they could make stone tools which enabeled them to eat meat. The ability to eat meat meant that they had brain development which enabled them to solve problems. These two steps are important because these developments led to where we are today.

Evolution Response

I believe that the most important stage in our evolution was Australopithecus Afarensis. In this stage of evolution they became bipedial which is very important to us and affects our daily lives. If we were not bipedial I am sure that our species would not be where it is today. Another important quality that we aqquired during this stage is being social. They began to build relationships and care for each other which they hadn't really before. I couldn't imagine my life if I wasn't social so I thank them for that!

Evolution

I think that the most important stage in the evolution of humans is the homo ergaster. The homo ergaster were the first to have whites in their eyes which allow them to think and understand other ergasters. This is important because they are able to make complicated decisions and hunt as a group. Their bigger brains are what gave them the biggest advantage because the world became clearer to them to the point that they could read others facial expressions.

Evolution

In my mind, i think the biggest jumps were in making stone tools and becoming smarter. As shown in the video, the Habilis were the ones affected by these steps. Tools, for starters, may them able to get and attain an array of foods. These tools made food easier than ever to get. On the other hand, their brains also began to develop. They, in fact, became effective problem solvers. It is obvious these steps are very important to us now...from cooking, to weapons, to school work, to real life problems, etc.

Evolution

I think the most important stage of evolution was when our ancestors were able to start trusting and helping each other out. Like modern times, our ancestors were able to work together to survive by sharing and making friends/having mates. An example from the movie that stuck out was when a few of them found food and then brought the carcass back to share it with the rest of the group. Though the other stages of evolution are all important, this stage showed that our ancestors were getting smarter because you can achieve a lot more in big groups as opposed to doing everything alone.

Human Evolution

I think the stage of evolution that is most important is when our common ancestors gained the ability to adjust to the different climates. Since our world is constantly changing, it is important to be able to survive in different environments. Even now when the seasons change each year, it is important for everyone to be able to adjust to the snow and negative temperatures in winter, as well as adjusting to the heat of the sun that comes in the summer. I also think when our ancestors began to communicate is a very important stage. When each different type was presented to us in the movie, I noticed that little by little, they would start communicating a little bit more. First, we just heard grunts, and then the sounds started to become more and more distinguishable.

evolution

I think that the most important stage would be evolution because its how everything began , if it wasnt for out long long ancestors we wouldnt be able to funtion properly , even thought they had to learn themselfs how to survive without any communication is crazy , evolution is the MOST important because thats how our ancestors began to learn how to hunt & also how to communicate within eachother. Thanks to them , look how we are now : )

Human Evolution

I think the stage of evolution that is most important is Homo Habilis; when our ancestors started to be able to eat and process meat. this allowed us to receive protein and for our brains to develope. without our brains developing we would not be able to come as far as we have and we would not have been able to learn and progress. this is, in my opinion, the most important step to our evolution.

Quarter 3, Week 3: Human Evolution

Which stage of human evolution do you think is the most significant?  Be sure to explain why by discussing specific developmental changes in that stage.

Harlow

I do not think that Harlows experiments need to be repeated. The moneys in the experiments had horrible lives. Monkeys need to be raised by other monkeys so that they know what to do in their lives as monkeys. Theses monkeys were raise by humans and did almost nothing that they would have done if they were raised by monkeys. Leave the monkeys alone. One experiment is enough.

Experiments

I believe these experiments were very wrong. I do not think they should ever be repeated again. The monkeys being tested were clearly harmed as would never live a normal life. If these experiments were to be repeated today I think many people would have a problem with them. Also, they are not even completely reliable. We will never truly know if they are true because no tests like this could ever be done on humans.

Experiment

I believe that they're just animals and a few ofthem can loose their childhoods for us humans to learn more on the subject. The experiments are not cruel and do not hurt and monkeys. I think that if someone wants to repeat this experiments they should go ahead at least it's going to create more jobs in America, a few animal can suffer, it's survival of the fittest just don't give them A-L-z One- 12

Harlow's Experiments

The experiments that were done by Harlow were unethical to say the least. These experiments should never be repeated, we got the answers that we wanted, so no one else needs to do these experiments again. If these experiments were better mapped out and made sure these poor monkeys wont be mentally disturbed for the rest of their lives, then yeah i would condone as many experiments that it would take. The monkeys that were involved in Harlow's experiments will never have the chance to live a normal life, and forever be afraid of their own kind. How sick is that.

monkey brains

Harlow's experiment results and the information gained about the parallels between human and ape's development are the reason why his experiment should not be repeated. The results from the experiment defined the permanent physiological damage that occurs in monkeys if they develop in an environment without social activity and a proper mother figure. along with other research about the mental similarities in human and animals have brought stronger animal rights concerns and an experiment like this would not fly.

harlow

I do not think the Harlow experiments need to be repeated again. They did them once and got the results. Those will not change from then to now. The experiments were unethical. Those baby monkeys grew up in isolation and were put out to cruel testing. There are better ways to learn about human behavior then what they did here. Never should be repeated.

Harlow's Experiments

I think that the Harlow experiments should not be repeated now or in the future because it's a form of animal cruelty. Sure, they found out that humans do have similarities with monkeys and apes, but that should be the end of the testings. If this experiment is done today, I think many people will criticise what anthologists do. The monkey in the video looked very much in pain and I think it was totally wrong for them to even think about doing this experiment.

monkeys like babies

I think Harlows experiments should not be repeated because they are unethical. the rule of thumb is usually if it would be unethical against a human child its usually unethical against an animal. imagine if someone were to steal babies from their hospital beds and raise them in isolation in metal cage just to run tests on them. We just learned how similar monkeys were to humans so clearly this experiment is wrong.

Harlow Experiments

The Harlow experiments should never be repeated again. They are cruel and unnecessary to today's society and the concluding experiment information isn't worth raising monkeys in isolation in cages. If anthropologists were to repeat these experiments, they would be criticized and hassled big time by organizations like PETA and most Americans. Leaving baby monkeys alone in a cage without a mom is and always will be considered in humane and cruel and they should definitely not be repeated.

Monkey

Back in the day half the stuff they did would be very illegal today. Not saying that today things are any better , but cruel treatment of animals was almost accepted back in the day. Even though the experiment did show some valuable information it shouldn't have been achieved in that way. They could have done so many other things to get the same results with a different approach. After experiments like this it left monkeys traumatized and scared. For the record now a days experiments should not even come close to this.

Monkey testing

The things done in the experiment shouldn't be repeated. they should have never done the experiments to start with. but they are interesting. they show how the monkeys react to certain things. it is interesting how the monkeys reacted

Harlows experiment

I do not think that Harlow's experiment should be repeated. It was unethical and unfair. Monkeys aren't made to be tested on, they are made to communicate and live with other monkeys. The experiment already gave us good information so there is no point in repeating it.

Harlow's Experiments

From seeing Harlow's experiments, I think they should not be repeated and investigated further. The rhusus monkeys looked so frightened by the experiments that this is torture done to them. So, investigating into Harlow's experiments would show the scared rhusus monkeys, and this could not show how they are like humans exactly. The animal community would see this as being dangerous for the rhusus monkeys by how they are seperated by their mothers at a young age. They would want to stop these experiments so that the rhusus monkeys can live more freely as humans do. This way rhusus monkeys can get better treatment.

Harry Harlow

No, I don't think that Harry Harlow's experiments should be repeated because they are unethical. They are severely damaging the monkeys psychologically. Taking baby monkeys away from their mothers straight from birth and then semi-isolating them is just wrong. If this experiment was performed on humans there would be an outcry.

Experiments

Harlow's experiments should not be restested because they are completely unethical. If any anthropologist repated these tests they would face huge criticism by groups like PETA. They might even face charges by a court. No one, even scientists should be allowed to torture animals

Harlow's Experiments

Should Harlow's Experiments be repeated again...is this even a question?!?! Seriously?! Who in their right mind would say that these unethical, cruel and disgusting experiments should be repeated AGAIN. Yeah, I get it, it's aaaaaall in the name of science, yada yada yada. I'd rather not know how a certain situation might be resolved if it ended up screwing up someones life, either human, ape or monkey. Plus, the way he raised the monkeys in complete solitude without their mothers, family members, or other monkeys was not good for the monkeys well being at all but that should be a given. And for anyone who says they should be repeated, let me ask you this. Would it be okay if it was a human being going through those experiments? Or better yet! What if that was YOU being experimented on?! I know personally I wouldn't enjoy it...just a little something to think about.

Harlow's Experiments

I think that Harlow's experiments should never be repeated. They are unethical, and are very cruel to the monkeys. Doing experiments such as his keep the monkeys from having a physical connection with other monkeys including their mothers. Instead they have a wire mother and a cloth mother. Many animal groups would be very opposed to scientists repeating any of his experiments.

Harlow Experiments

I do not think that the experiments should be repeated at all. The things they did to the monkeys were cruel and jsut not right. They could never life there life they way they wanted to because they were always stuck having horrible things tested on them. All in all I think that the experiments that were tested on these monkeys were horrible and should defineatly not be done again.

harlow studies

I do not believe these experiments should be repeated. by the standards of the 1950's these were ok, but today these experiments would be seen as cruel to the animals. Also, any scientist that dared to repeat these would have his/her reputation ripped to shreds by animal rights groups

Harlows Expiriments.!

I have a very strong opinion when it comes to those poor monkeys.They don't diserve to be tested on. It's animal cruelty, seeying them get treated the way they did on the video we watched in class was horrible. Harlow's expiriments should NEVER be repeated again. Just because they are monkeys, it doesn't mean that they dont have feelings. I say, if they want to test them, they should test them in there own habitat instead of taking them out of there home.

Harlow's Experiments

No I don't believe that Harlow's experiments should be repeated. Everyone in our class agreed that his experiments were cruel to the animals. Therefore they were unethical, and should not be repeated. We learned enough from the data collected that we don't need to put more monkeys through the same traumatizing situations. Besides, with so many animal rights groups like PETA, there is no way these experiments would be able to be redone. All the animal rights groups would band together and take down the lab where the experiments were being held.

Harlow

I definitely do not think the experiments were repeated. They were cruel to monkeys and caused severe damaged to an animal that has emotions. While watching the video of the monkey that was being scared it made most of the class uncomfortable because we felt bad for it. So, this makes the experiment very unethical. Although we learn a lot from experiments like this, I do not think they should be repeated because of the damage it does to the subject. I think we should take what we learned and what we can infer and leave it at that.

Harlow's Experiments

Harry Harlow had some interesting ideas to help us understand the behaviors of the younger generation but i don't think that these experiments should ever be redone. A monkey needs a real mother to start off it's life with, not some fake cloth cover wire contraption. And the way he scared that little creature was so cruel. no one likes to experience the feeling of fear.

Harlow Experiments

I do not think the Harlow Experiments should be repeated. Even in his time, the tests were viewed as inhumane. Although they discovered a few good findings, they were still cruel. Also, there's no point in repeating them today. They were done back then and are over with. We have all the necessary data we need.

Harry Harlow Experiments

I don't think these experiments should be repeated. I think it was so sad seeing the baby monkeys suffer. They would never be able to have a normal life because of these experiments. If this were to happen today many animal rights groups would be furious! On a good note these experiments did help us see some comparisons between primates and humans. I guess it was okay to perform these experiments back then, but performing them in today's society wouldn't be right.

harlow

I don't think that Harlow's experiments should be repeated. Although they were very interesting and helpful, they shouldn't be done again. It ruined the lives of the monkeys that he experimented on. The experiments proved that mentally and emotionaly monkeys are most alike humans. Doing another experiment will just show the same evidence. I'm glad that these experiments were done once but should only be done once.

Harlow Experiments

I don't think these experiments should be tested again. They are completely unethical and cruel to the monkeys that they are testing. How would Harlow like it if he were raised in isolation without a mother and had only a piece of cloth to cling onto when he was scared? Animals have feelings too. If they tried these experiments today, it would cause a huge uproar in the animal rights community.

Harlow's Experiments

I don't think the experiments should be repeated because we have a lot of information from them already. We were able to see how the monkeys reacted to certain situations and connected that to our own species. It showed the similarities between primates and humans. But the experiments were unethical and it was difficult to see the monkeys have to go through them. The monkeys weren't able to grow up in a normal and safe environment which isn't right. Since all of the tests were recorded I think that is a good amount of research for scientists to have and they don't need to do anymore of the same type of experiments.

Harlow

I do not think they should repeat the experiments. I do understand why they did them, but as you could tell they were ethically wrong and I think all of us would agree it was difficult to see everything those monkeys had to go through. Everything was video typed and the evidence that we share commonalities is clear as day. I still however am unsure of what side I should be on when it comes to leaving them in their natural habitat (the jungle) or holding them in zoos (?) for research.

Harlow

I don't think Harlow's experiments should be repeated. The experiments helped us understand how another primates reacts to things and that helped us see the connection between them and humans (specifically toddlers). But it was really sad to see the things the baby monkey had to experience for science sake. The experiment has been done, we have video to see the reactions so there is no reason to do it again. Plus, so many people would be angry if it was, (animal rights groups).

Harlow's Experiments

I think that in many ways Harry Harlows experiments were quite helpful to getting closer to the connection that there is between humans and primates. Even though I do not agree with the way that he choose to go about performing these experiments I think it was only  his intention to have a better understanding of the relationship between our two species, and through his experiments that is exactly what he did. Without that the current research going towards this question might not be going on today. He was not going out of his way to harm the monkeys in this experiment but only to see how they would react. Still I think that all that can be found out from these experiments is known and therefore uneccessary to be done again.

Harlow's Experiments

Harlow's experiments helped us understand, how animals will reacted with certain situations and then compare them to, what a human will do in the same situation. But I don't think those experiments should be repeated, they are to cruel for the monkeys/animals. I believe that there must be other ways to test those monkeys, and have the same result. In the video we see that Harlow really enjoy doing those experiments. I think that not right thing to do expecially when you are a scientist.

Harry Harlow Experiments

I do not think that they should repeat the experiments that Harry Harlow did. The monkey's that were the test subjects obviously were traumatized by the whole thing, can you image what would happen if it was done again! We learned all that we needed to learn from the first experiments he performed so I don't think anything would have changed in how it would affect us. I think that the anthropological community would have some explaining  to do when the organization PETA came to check on them and eventually sue them to cruelty towards animals.

Experiment

The tests performed on the monkey did help us get a better understanding of how animals would react much like humans would in various situations. However, although this experiment was influential and helped us gain insight, I do not believe it should ever be repeated. It was creul and inhumane how the monkey was treated because he will never have a normal life. The experiment tainted his brain through the isolation and as a result of that, he will never know how to interact with others. Animal rights associations would have a very negative reaction and the experiment will have the same results if repeated a second time.

The tests should not be repeated

The tests on the monkeys should not be reapeated. They were already done so we know what the results will be. We would learn nothing from redoing these tests and therefore it should not be done. If it was done the people would lash out at whoever the experimenter was for torturing monkeys and would only make PETA stronger.

Harry Harlow Experiments

No, I personally don't think Harry Harlow's experiments should be done again. They were against many moral decisions, and they didn't prove anything that was life changing. It was neat to see how similar monkeys behave to humans, but that could have been proved in a more efficient way. Harlow has ruined the lives of these monkeys for ever. He didn't think about the impact it would have on them, nor did he care. I think there are much more reasonable experiments that won't hurt a monkey's mindset or cause other abnormal behavior.

Harlow's Experiments

The experiments that Harlow performed on the monkeys played a very influential part in the advancement of anthropology. He was able create a much better understanding of humans through these experiments, but they shouldn’t be repeated. They were cruel, unethical, and made it impossible for them to have a normal happy monkey life. Back then, there weren’t many rules and regulations that come with performing an experiment, but if Harlow’s experiments were to be repeated today I think they would never pass the numerous laws that exist to protect animal rights. Animal protection organizations, such as PETA, would never let another animal face the emotional torture that those monkeys were put through. The experiments were a major discovery in anthropology, but they were unethical and should not be repeated.

Harlow's Experiments

I do not think these tests should be repeated. I think those tests were cruel and unhealthy for the monkeys.i believe there are plenty of other tests scientists can use to prove the same thing without having to damage the monkey. I also think there is no reason to re test these because they prove that monkeys are like humans socially, which we have used many studies to further prove that, therefore proving this yet again will not be beneficial.

Harlow Experiments

In my mind, these experiments should not be retested. Today, people would react in a terrible fashion. It seems nowadays, people are much easier affected by poor decisions. The excuse "it was done earlier" would simply not work. It is fine Harlow performed these earlier, but now isn't the time again. Yay monkeys!

antropology

i think the way anthropologist have been doing these expiriments on these poor chimps and monkeys is not right. Those expiriments on that poor monkey was just hard to watch the way the damaged that monkey mentaly. I just feel like these animals are wild and they should be living in the jungle were they belong. If you take a human and study them thats inhumane but when you do it to a poor monkey or a chimp then i feel like its wrong. If you want to study monkeys then study these primates in there natural habitat and leve them alone.

Experiments

i don't think anthropologists should repeat this process because like "us" human beings have feelings many animals have feelings too, we wouldn't like for a child from a mother to be taken away so why does it make it right for a scientist to take a chimp away from it mother? i think if he repeats this process he'll give the idea that animal testing is right which i am so against it after watching Dr. Harry Harlow's experiments because they suffer. . .

Experiments

I think the experiments can be repeated but only if there were some changes to how the animals were treated. Many animal groups now a days would be going after them and would be saying they are abusing the animals. I guess the experiments showed that monkeys need love too but im not sure if it was worth doing all those things to them just to find out.