It needs to be said about humans.

[DeMouse]

Discounting sapience the only advantage humans have over other earth species is endurance. We evolved this way because instead of sprinting after our prey in the african savanna humans evolved to keep walking after it while tracking. We developed our brains for tracking, and then tool-making because of this.

The Na'vi on the other hand seem to have evolved around ambushing their prey with arrows. The result of this is that Na'vi should be far more effective sprinters, have better eyesight and awareness of their surroundsings and have more comprehensive non-verbal communication than humans.

Humans on the otherhand should have much better stamina and creativity.

Just some interesting extrapolation.

[Ximphron]

You make some good points but not everything here seems right.
We do in fact have amazing endurance, but we are also capable of trapping and ambushing without any problem at all. As you said we did evolve to track and endurance hunt however, shown by the fact that we can outrun any other animal for long distance. I'm not sure if the Na'vi ever take down animals completely without tools, by chasing them down till exhaustion and then tackling them like we often used to.

About the Na'vi's eyesight. From my own conclusions I decided that it is different, not better. For example I would suppose that because Pandora never get very dark, we could see better int the dark then they, while they would see better in dim light. I'm also not sure how well they could see certain colors we do, as the Padoran color scheme would favor seeing blue while our own eyes favor seeing red. Also, an ambush predator would have motion detecting eyesight, but not as good of long distance observation. Our eyes are built to scan the horizon, not to detect small nearby movements like the Na'vi would.
I'm also not sure if they are more aware of their surroundings. Any human who has lived a hunting lifestyle is aware of every minute detail that goes on around them. I lived with a hunting group for a while and ever since I notice things other people do not, I can teel what time of day it is by the smell, I can identify someone by their footsteps a long way away, and I notice things on the ground other people do not. We have forgotten largely about how to be aware of our surroundings but we are certainly capable.
In non-verbal communication, also not sure. Also when I lived "primitively" for a while, I could understand something as simple as eye contact to mean "theres a rabbit over there, why don't you kill it for the soup?"

Sprinters i'll agree with. They're have larger strides (but they might have more drag due to this large size as well).
Neither would walk/run particularly well in the others environment so the comparison doesn't really work. Humans would find it impossible to bound around over massive branches or run on Pandora soil. Likewise, Na'vi would find it impossible to run in the far denser, darker jungles of earth that many humans easily go through. The Na'vi way of walking (digging their toes into the ground for extra push) would also end up terribly here by not working at all or resulting in broken toes.

On a maybe-related note, i've been trying to study Na'vi archery, as I am a archer myself. They seem to favor highly decorative longbows, contrary to us, who have generally favored very compact practical bows for hunting.
I find this to mirror Na'vi and Human physiology as well. Na'vi are far more gracile and elongated. We look neanderthal-like by comparison, short, compact, and robust.

[DeMouse]

Its nice to see somone with a good perspective on the sort of differences I have been thinking about.

What about muscle density? What difference woudl their size make compared to the lower gravity?

They seem to be very acrobatic so I would think their muscles would be light and favour rapid prcise movements in order to help with agility.

Are their bones supposed to be more dense or just have a special compound?

[HufweMakto]

Technically speaking, with the Na'vi, we are talking about a species that is almost perfectly adapted to the landscape it inhabits. Na'vis have bodies and limbs developed to navigate forests, namely the canopy and the floor covered in roots and mosses. While humans probably adapted to life on a flat plain, namely savannah, the Na'vi are much better adapted to being hunters and gatherers in an environment that would be downright hard to navigate in. Add to this is their big toe that's an added grip on the uneven ground below them, whether it is roots or branches. Humans upon the other hand must seem downright clumsy in the way they have to travel through the forest.

It should also be noted that the Pandorapedia also mentions that Na'vi in other binomes (such as swamps, oceans, and deserts) are adapted to living in their environs pretty well to (it actually describes the adaptions and differences to that of different dog breeds). I would guess that desert dwelling Na'vi have specific adaptations to coping with heat and dryness, and swamp dwelling Na'vis have adaptations to resist diseases from insects, fungal skin infections, and maybe ways of navigating through waters. These are just my speculations.

[_Omaticaya_]

Humans upon the other hand must seem downright clumsy in the way they have to travel through the forest.

-_-...I really don't understand your speculations sorry... I believe Humans can be like Na'vi. Just see how the natives inhabit the rainforest on our Earth too.
2nd, I think it's hilarious and very Odd, that you, being such a Firm evolutionist whom you've proven to be, think humans are clumsy in the forest? Hahahahah, fail? seriously... OMG I thought we we're all monkeys! Isn't that what you love to say? I was just getting a banana now in fact what a coincidence!

...

**** this bull****... Instead of speculating on what we could be or what we could not be, people should stop reading books and get the hell off the couch and experience some life and nature, to find out YOURSELF. what you are capable and not capable of doing.

3rd, this thread sucks ***.

[HufweMakto]

-_-...I really don't understand your speculations sorry... I believe Humans can be like Na'vi. Just see how the natives inhabit the rainforest on our Earth too.
2nd, I think it's hilarious and very Odd, that you, being such a Firm evolutionist whom you've proven to be, think humans are clumsy in the forest? Hahahahah, fail? seriously... OMG I thought we we're all monkeys! Isn't that what you love to say? I was just getting a banana now in fact what a coincidence!

...

**** this bull****... Instead of speculating on what we could be or what we could not be, people should stop reading books and get the hell off the couch and experience some life and nature, to find out YOURSELF. what you are capable and not capable of doing.

3rd, this thread sucks ***.

I don't get why you have to get so defensive when I make an opinion about something. Are you just unhappy or frustrated that someone who likes the Na'vi also may hav opinions differing from yours, or are you just here to troll me if I happen to have an opinion or even post something in this thread. I never did mean to offend or disparage, I'm just stating my opinion and my speculations about what might happen in the Avatar series. If you don't like it then, DON'T POST.

Answer me this question then: Why does Neytiri call Jake Sully a "baby" then? It implies that he's downright clumsy and stupid from the get-go, but she also respects him. I never did demean Na'vis or humanity, I'm just basing the facts here. The Na'vi do see humans as being clumsy, but it's the very fact that they can also see through this mask, like when Neytiri held Jake in her hands and says "I see you", that was not just epic because she loves him and just saved his life, it's also because she can see into his real self. She loves him for who he is, a brave and noble soul.

And also, we're descended from great apes, such as chimpanzees, and from what I know chimpanzees are more at home on the forest floor than in the treetops, though they are known in climb up trees. Gorillas don't neccesarily climb trees either. Monkeys are another evolutionary branch, but we're not directly related to them. And as for a fact, there are monkey species that don't neccesarily take to trees either, and mainly forage on the ground.

[DeMouse]

I think the biggest evolutionary difference is that we are naturally endurance hunters and trackers, while the na'vi are ambush predators.

Humans can be quite apt moving along the jungle floor. Humans who moved back to the forests simply adapted their tracking methods to the new environment and use pretty much the same hunting straegy as they did on the plains. Kepp following your prey till it collapses.

[Ximphron]

"What about muscle density? What difference woudl their size make compared to the lower gravity?"
-- Lower gravity would make for less dense muscles probably. This may be countered by the thicker atmosphere though as they need to push through thicker air. (But pandora apparently makes humans weaker so less strength must be needed to move around). Lower gravity means larger body size. So would a thicker atmosphere because it could support larger bodies without them crushing themselves.

"They seem to be very acrobatic so I would think their muscles would be light and favour rapid prcise movements in order to help with agility."
-- That would make sense, just as human muscles are built alternatively for energy efficiency, endurance and durability, while we are terrible at quick movement.

"Are their bones supposed to be more dense or just have a special compound?"
-- The film explanation is "naturally occurring carbon fiber". Lighter, less dense bones for Na'vi would be beneficial for quick sprints or acrobatics, so I would assume their bones are lighter. Long distance walking or running humans would benefit from heavier, more robust bones on the other hand.

"Humans upon the other hand must seem downright clumsy in the way they have to travel through the forest."
-- Humans who live in the forest can run through it faster than they can on open ground. It all depends on where and how you learn to walk.

"I think the biggest evolutionary difference is that we are naturally endurance hunters and trackers, while the na'vi are ambush predators."
-- This seems very likely based on speculation, but theres no confirmation. I think Na'vi are likely less predatory than humans, but theres no proof of that either. Its just that humans can take down animals without weapons, but I don't see how Na'vi could do that as they don't seem dangerous enough to ambush effectively without weapons. This could be due to eywaregulation though.

And Omaticaya, I normally don't have a problem with you or anyone. I'm extremely tolerant of everyone. In many of your posts you're very kind. But your comment here seems like downright trolling. You might have been in a bad mood when you posted that, but please respect other people's right to converse about topics that do not interest you.

[Imperius Dictatio]

He's always been like this.

[_Omaticaya_]

are you just here to troll me
No, you do that better than me.

If you don't like it then, DON'T POST
I thought it was the whole point of a forum? Don't you reply to something I write if you don't like it? yeah, you do, and everyone does, what's the problem?

P.S. Imperius Dictatio, why don't you go suck some dick? Ask your mom she's got good contacts, trust me :nwink:

[Ximphron]

I don't care who started it or who trolled who or whatever.
There's too much pointless bickering going on on both sides, and retaliation only makes the problem worse. The other folks here may troll your treads but two wrongs don't make a right; they just escalate the situation. This goes for everyone here, both sides.

If we could discuss the actual subject of this thread, that would be wonderful. Set our petty disagreements aside for once.

Think nice thoughts...
http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2011/11/305.jpg

[DeMouse]

I don't care who started it or who trolled who or whatever. There's too much pointless bickering going on on both sides, and retaliation only makes the problem worse. The other folks here may troll your treads but two wrongs don't make a right; they just escalate the situation. This goes for everyone here, both sides. If we could discuss the actual subject of this thread, that would be wonderful. Set our petty disagreements aside for once. Think nice thoughts...
Ah but petty disagreements are what make life so interesting.

Don't know why anyone would get so angry about the estistence of a thread about human phisiology and its differences with the na'vi in the board thats supposedly for the RDA and Humanity fans.

Omaticaya.
34426

I may be a little more argumentitive than necessary but I am not a troll.

A troll is somone who says things to get a reaction and not becuase they actually believe them.

[HufweMakto]

No, you do that better than me.

I thought it was the whole point of a forum? Don't you reply to something I write if you don't like it? yeah, you do, and everyone does, what's the problem?

P.S. Imperius Dictatio, why don't you go suck some dick? Ask your mom she's got good contacts, trust me :nwink:

I don't troll, I have a life, I have never trolled here. You just gave me a label that has nothing to do with me. I have no idea why you have the idea that I hate people, but I don't.

I came to this forum feeling like I could talk about Avatar, I never wanted a war to start. It's a shame people have to get reactionary over small things.

All I can say is this:

I'm not a hate, I don't hate you and I'm not a troll. So please, in the name of decentcey, just don't jump at me when I say my mind. It's getting annoying.

[Wanderlust]

All HufwaeMakto was saying was we are specialized for the savanna.

[DeMouse]

34434
What is it with this forum and misunderstanding the word troll?


Somone isn't a troll because they have opinions that make you angry.
They are a troll if they are making up opinions TO make you angry.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

i have spent 29 years on this stinking hellhole of a polluted planet,and i want to hear one GOOD reason why i should defend or be proud of the humanity collective. there are plenty of worthy,accomplished,and admirable individuals in this species,both past and present,but i am not asking about them....i am talking about the species as a whole. i have absolutely no reason to defend humanity,none whatsoever,as they have gotten progressively worse every single year of my life,and there's no end to the madness!


all i ever wanted was a single reason worth defending humanity for. *good line,Jake Sully :)*

[Ximphron]

Ja'k.
That's not really related to the thread, but anyways, in first world nations things are actually getting better. Take The United States for example. Wild areas are actually increasing in size, great amounts of torn up land is getting converted back to a natural state, environmental responsibility of individuals is becoming more and more common, and the population is actually expected to decrease soon here. Within this coming century humanity is actually expected to either see a population drop or a massive population crash, we will never reach 20 billion as shown in Avatar. If we do, all of that population increase is going into developing nations, basically the USA won' urbanize much more than it already has because we've hit near peak population development here. In many European countries population is rapidly decreasing. The environmental problems of the future will be mostly in Africa because they will have larger populations and less solutions.

[HufweMakto]

Actually I hope we never reach 20 billion on Earth, it would strain the environment to the breaking point, even though we have already reached 7 billion this year. All I think would be possible would be a better awareness of just how precious our blue dot is in this sea of black and stars. We have to remember we only have one home, and we should take better care of it than we have been lately. The one thing that concerns me the most is the fact that human greed and ignorance still compounds our dicisions even now.

[Wanderlust]

From order to chaos and from chaos to order

[DeMouse]

Even I agree with you guys on this one.

The greatest present threat to humanity is overpopulation. The problem is that the nations most responsible for this are the ones which have the least concern for long-term planning and will probably never take steps to curb the problem. Except for china which has already done so with great success. In india they do try but so far every program that attempts to reduce the birth rate has faild horribly. At one point they were even forcefully sterilising all criminals.

[Ximphron]

China is doing quite well, but they are having problems supporting the elderly now. However, elderly comfort vs survival of humanity and the planet...
Since the USA will never be able to pass a 1 child policy or anything I hope fertility rates continue to decrease here.
India's gonna be hell soon unless they figure something out..

Everyone here agrees on something! Hooray!

[Wanderlust]

This is what we will ultimately become, creating our own worlds and living off asteroids and other dead worlds. No need to mess with natural biospheres which will be protected. (rare resource argument is worthless and only exists to advance fictional plotlines)

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2011/11/334.jpg

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

^ that one part looks like a Halo ring. lol. :) nice!

[DeMouse]

^ that one part looks like a Halo ring. lol. :) nice!

Makes me think more of Stargate than Halo personally.

Most reminds me of EVE online.

[HufweMakto]

Part of me wants to say wormhole maker for that machine in the middle.

Though another parts says Black Hole, even though I know that's probably not the case.

[ScottWashburn]

Back to the original question about relative Na'vi and Human physical capabilities :) The Na'vi are about twice as big as a human. Strength is a function of the cross-section which is a square function. So, if you take something and double the size it would be four times as strong (2x2). Mass, however is a volume or cube function, so you double something in size and it will weigh eight times as much (2x2x2). So, a Na'vi would be (on average) four times as strong as a human in absolute terms. However, the human would have a better power-to-weight ratio. So a human would be more agile and faster in relation to its size (although probably not in absolute terms). It's the same sort of thing about how an ant can carry many times its own body weight and small insects move blindingly fast compared to larger animals. As you get smaller your power-to-weight ratio just gets better and better.

Humans, evolving in a stronger gravitational field also probably have better reflexes. They have to be able to react more quickly to catch falling objects or save themselves from a fall.

The large Na'vi eyes probably would give them better eyesight. When we are talking about things like cameras or telescopes, it's all about how much light that can be captured, not raw magnification. Of course a lot would depend on the density of the light receptors on the Na'vi retinas. If they were scaled up in proportion to the eye, their eyesight might not be any better after all.

As for how well adapted they are to the forest, it would sort of depend on what sort of environment they originally evolved in. And, of course, they are tool users. Once you reach that stage you start to adapt your environment to you more than you adapt to it.

And, another big unknown is how much Eywa is involved in things :)

[Ximphron]

Thanks for your insight into he matter, scott.
Great info on the first part, that helps a lot with the strength/agility/etc question
It's really hard to tell with Na'vi eyes. I assumed they were like cat eyes, better at seeing movement but worse at picture clarity and seeing red. We can' really know however. The pandorapaedia claims that all Na'vi senses are better than ours, but that seems a bit ridiculous because I see no evolutionary reason for it.

[HufweMakto]

^I noted that you mentioned red in your comments. I noticed that much of the clothing, even the decorations of the Na'vi contain red. It seems to be a rather interesting note that Na'vi of higher rank seem to wear a good amount of red. Do they see red? I think I need to look through the survival guide on that, because I believe it says something about how Na'vi see in a full range of colors, similar to humans.

[DeMouse]

^I noted that you mentioned red in your comments. I noticed that much of the clothing, even the decorations of the Na'vi contain red. It seems to be a rather interesting note that Na'vi of higher rank seem to wear a good amount of red. Do they see red? I think I need to look through the survival guide on that, because I believe it says something about how Na'vi see in a full range of colors, similar to humans.

They probably wouldn't but clearly do.

Its one of those things where the viewers analyse it more than the writers.


At the very least humans would certainly have better night vision due to not being used to constant bioluminescence.

[prowler]

At the very least humans would certainly have better night vision due to not being used to constant bioluminescence.

You can't say for sure... For all we know the Na'vi might have great night vision...

[Ximphron]

I would assume not, Pandora doesn't get very dark so they would have no need for it. However their large eye size would hint at good low light vision.
Based on their environment, humans should be able to see better than Na'vi in the dark and in bright light, but Na'vi should be able to see better in low/medium light. I imagine that they could see more shades of blue than us as well due to pandora being predominantly bluish as opposed to Earth's yellowy greens.
But true, we can never know for sure. It's all just speculation.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

You can't say for sure... For all we know the Na'vi might have great night vision...


i believe the Na'vi have very good night vision,and both night-time mobility and nocturnal hunting skills. :)

[HufweMakto]

Speaking of the red, I remember watching a documentary on reef fishes a long time ago. In that docu, they shined a light on the reef, showing red fish. They were at first puzzled by why a fish would have such a bright coloration, until they took away the light. Under the water, they became dull and almost invisable. I would think that the red would hide the Na'vi well against the nighttime of Pandora, since nighttime on Pandora would be akin to a oceanic coral reef, in terms of lighting.

[Ximphron]

Yes, having red coloration in the ocean is useful. Red light can't reach into the ocean well, and most fish can't see red. Even though the ocean is really bluish being red is a great form of camouflage.

[DeMouse]

i believe the Na'vi have very good night vision,and both night-time mobility and nocturnal hunting skills. :)

No. They must have terrible night vision. Neytiri needed to douse jake's fire in order to get the bioluminscence back up and running in order to even find her way back home. Without the bioluminescence I believe that the na'vi would be almost blind at night time. Even with torches.

[prowler]

No. They must have terrible night vision. Neytiri needed to douse jake's fire in order to get the bioluminscence back up and running in order to even find her way back home. Without the bioluminescence I believe that the na'vi would be almost blind at night time. Even with torches.

How do you know she need to put out Jake's fire because she might have bad night vision? It could of been because of other reasons aswell.. Just saying.. :)

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

Neytiri put out the torch because it disturbed the natural flow of energy and spirits of the forest at night,and yes,Lady Ney and her fellow Na'vi People have excellent nightvision. :):in-love::inlove:

[_Omaticaya_]

^Exactly what I wanted to write, well said Ja'k :) She turned it off because it was just the wrong place and time for a torch to be on, the natural flow of the forest's night life was 'broken' by Jake, altough it's not his fault, wasn't intentional,, he was just trying to stay alive ^_^ Neyney did everything just right, even prayed with the viper wolves... :nlove:

[prowler]

Neytiri put out the torch because it disturbed the natural flow of energy and spirits of the forest at night,and yes,Lady Ney and her fellow Na'vi People have excellent nightvision. :):in-love::inlove:


^Exactly what I wanted to write, well said Ja'k :) She turned it off because it was just the wrong place and time for a torch to be on, the natural flow of the forest's night life was 'broken' by Jake, altough it's not his fault, wasn't intentional,, he was just trying to stay alive ^_^ Neyney did everything just right, even prayed with the viper wolves... :nlove:

Have to agree with you both here :)

[Ximphron]

I think the main reason to doubt night vision on Pandora is the simple reason that it doesn't get very dark there like Earth does.

I interpreted Neytiri putting out the torch as a way to protect Jake and herself as it was calling attention to them. Making fire is a great idea on Earth. Not so much on Pandora.

[DeMouse]

Even modern humans have no where near as good night vision as we once did due to all the lights in our cities, and thats after only one hundered or so years of streets being lit at night. Now imagine we had evolved from day one in a permenantly lit environment. We would be completely blind in the dark. Even during the day earth rainforests are not much lighter than pandora is a night due to the thickness of the canopy (the pandoran one has bigger trees but more gaps, otherwise no light would get through during the day.)

Even accounting for lolnaviareperfect bull**** it is completely illogical to think that their nightvision would be even nearly as good as a human's.

[HufweMakto]

How do you know she need to put out Jake's fire because she might have bad night vision? It could of been because of other reasons aswell.. Just saying.. :)

I have to agree, it seems like it hurts her eyes when she's trying to put out the fire. I notice everytime I watch that movie, she tries to sheild her eyes or turn away from them.

I'm going to throw a theory out there, but it's not exactly a well-lit up environment when it comes to Pandoran nights. It's more like walking around in a lazer tag arena (I don't know if anyone here has had the experience, but as a kid I used to go to those things almost every summer). It's not exactly well-lit up, but it's not exactly dark. But still, you have to keep a good eye out or you run into people or walls.

If I could compare anything on Pandora to something man-made, it would be that.

[Ximphron]

Even modern humans have no where near as good night vision as we once did due to all the lights in our cities, and thats after only one hundered or so years of streets being lit at night. Now imagine we had evolved from day one in a permenantly lit environment. We would be completely blind in the dark. Even during the day earth rainforests are not much lighter than pandora is a night due to the thickness of the canopy (the pandoran one has bigger trees but more gaps, otherwise no light would get through during the day.)

Even accounting for lolnaviareperfect bull**** it is completely illogical to think that their nightvision would be even nearly as good as a human's.

I agree they don't have as good night vision. As you said, Earth jungles are much more dense and are as dark in the day as pandora is at night.
Na'vi would not have good night vision for the simple reason that the nights are far brighter than earths.
i prefer my nights pitch black. I have amazing night vision. I can see pieces of dirt when others while blind because they were used to night lights and the like. Pandora is one gigantic night light.

The Pandorapedia thing says Na'vi have better night vision than us, but that goes with my "Pandora is too perfect for no reason" complaint.

[Suzy]

According to the Pandorapedia (http://www.pandorapedia.com/navi/life_society/the_navi), the Na'vis' "eyes are large and sensitive to wavelengths of light inclusive of the human visual range, and beyond into near-infrared". Though according to the original scriptment their vision extended in the opposite direction, into the ultraviolet: "Grace starts giving him survival pointers. How to avoid the things that bite and sting and suck. Phalanxia, the deadly projectile plant, shows up bright as a neon sign in the ultraviolet-sensitive avatar vision." I wonder why that was changed?

[DeMouse]

According to the Pandorapedia (http://www.pandorapedia.com/navi/life_society/the_navi), the Na'vis' "eyes are large and sensitive to wavelengths of light inclusive of the human visual range, and beyond into near-infrared". Though according to the original scriptment their vision extended in the opposite direction, into the ultraviolet: "Grace starts giving him survival pointers. How to avoid the things that bite and sting and suck. Phalanxia, the deadly projectile plant, shows up bright as a neon sign in the ultraviolet-sensitive avatar vision." I wonder why that was changed?

Being able to see extra wavelengths is not the same as haivng better night vision though.

Night vision is about how well your eyes can adjust to low quantities of light. Being able to see extra spectrums actually is evidence of poot night vision because the cells for absorbing those wavelengths would crowd out the extra cells needed to better dect a specific wavelength.

[Tsyal Makto]

Isn't this all assuming the rod-cone structure of the Na'vi eye is analogues to humans? It could be completely different, this is all non-canonical speculation, at this point. Personally, I'm waiting for JC to put something out.

[DeMouse]

Isn't this all assuming the rod-cone structure of the Na'vi eye is analogues to humans? It could be completely different, this is all non-canonical speculation, at this point. Personally, I'm waiting for JC to put something out.

Well obviously it is non-canon speculation but i'm just pointing out what types of differences there would logically be. Its a mental excercise.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

Even accounting for lolnaviareperfect bull**** it is completely illogical to think that their nightvision would be even nearly as good as a human's.


see,you had a more a more or less alright post until you threw the anti-Na'vi snark in there. you need to lock that snarks**t down! :angry:


34895

[DeMouse]

see,you had a more a more or less alright post until you threw the anti-Na'vi snark in there. you need to lock that snarks**t down! :angry:


34895

That wasn't anti-navi. That was anti-naviareperfectineverywaylol.

It was anti-the people who ruin the Na'vi for me.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

That wasn't anti-navi. That was anti-naviareperfectineverywaylol.

It was anti-the people who ruin the Na'vi for me.



no one can teach you to See. it is as simple as that. that is all.

[DeMouse]

no one can teach you to See. it is as simple as that. that is all.

Nothing to do with seeing. It is to do with the people who go around saying that everything about the Na'vi is better than everything else in every way. Makes me think of them as a mary-sue race even though I know they werent actually written to be that way.

[prowler]

Nothing to do with seeing. It is to do with the people who go around saying that everything about the Na'vi is better than everything else in every way. Makes me think of them as a mary-sue race even though I know they werent actually written to be that way.

With that attitude of course you will never be able to truly see...
34959

[Tsyal Makto]

Lol I love Anderson Cooper.

[DeMouse]

What? not seeing that the Na'vi are the most perfect beings in existance anywhere ever?

I don't want to See that thankyou very much.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

the Na'vi are perfectly in tune with their enviroment,their spiritualism,their fellow community,and their roles in the Pandoran chain of life/energy. yup,they are perfect in my mind,whether or not individual members of the Na'vi community may have some personal quirks or idiosyncrasies...but then again,oddities of personality does not necessarily make an individual imperfect.

[DeMouse]

the Na'vi are perfectly in tune with their enviroment,their spiritualism,their fellow community,and their roles in the Pandoran chain of life/energy. yup,they are perfect in my mind,whether or not individual members of the Na'vi community may have some personal quirks or idiosyncrasies...but then again,oddities of personality does not necessarily make an individual imperfect.

they can be perfect for teir environment without being overly perfect. There are many things that they would not have due to the environment they live in. EG: effective night vision since they have no reason to evolve it. Humans are the most perfect species we know of for prospering on earth. Just because we are damagin other species does not remove the fact that were have been very successful in shaping the environment to suit ourselves.

[HufweMakto]

Nothing to do with seeing. It is to do with the people who go around saying that everything about the Na'vi is better than everything else in every way. Makes me think of them as a mary-sue race even though I know they werent actually written to be that way.

It's funny that the entirity of the TvTropes community seems to think that way, when they never wonder what it would be like to live in a jungle where plants shoot poisonous darts, large megafauna still roam (and will either eat you or kill you or both), seismic activity, killer pterodactyl thingies, huge pterodactyls that will swoop in and eat you, and amongst other things, trying not to get killed when you travel outside. Cameron called the Na'vi survivors for a reason, and if people are going to whine about how the Na'vi seem to fit so well into their environment, they should take a good look at themselves. Humans can live in an environment that maybe some other aliens would consider hostile, with our atmosphere, our dangerous animals (like black-widows and rattlesnakes in my part of the world), poisons in the land, sea and sky, as well as perhaps other factors, like nuclear war and such. But somehow, desprite all odds, humanity survives.

If you were born and raise on a planet, you would be adapted to live on it very well, some would say perfectly well.

Then again, no one can teach you how to see.

[Ximphron]

Y'all are going into my Perfection on Pandora discussion now...

[_Omaticaya_]

If you were born and raise on a planet, you would be adapted to live on it very well, some would say perfectly well.
Then again, no one can teach you how to see.

Well said HufweMakto. This is what I've been saying for ages... And I love how the 'No one can teach you to See' idea, which to me is Fundamental, is starting to 'sink in' everyone's mind lately I've noticed; good to know :nsmile:

[DeMouse]

If you were born and raise on a planet, you would be adapted to live on it very well, some would say perfectly well.

Then again, no one can teach you how to see.



they can be perfect for teir environment without being overly perfect. There are many things that they would not have due to the environment they live in. EG: effective night vision since they have no reason to evolve it. Humans are the most perfect species we know of for prospering on earth. Just because we are damagin other species does not remove the fact that were have been very successful in shaping the environment to suit ourselves.


.....

[Ximphron]

I have to go with DeMouse on this. The Na'vi have a number of abilities for no reason at all other than to make them superior or something of that sort.
I like the Na'vi of course, but the night vision argument is a valid one.

Some explanations for certain things might come from the fact that Na'vi are not apex predators like humans are.

Also I believe the Na'vi were actually intended to be a "MarySue Race" as you put it.

[DeMouse]

If we are using the Na'Vi living on a deathworld as an excuse, how would a Catachan hold up on pandora then? (ignoring the whole poison atmosphere thing)

Catachan Jungle Fighters - Lexicanum (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Catachan_Jungle_Fighters#.TuRBGPLhs3A)

[Ximphron]

You also sort of have to ask why Pandora is a "deathworld". Why evolve to that point? Evolutionary arms race? Here on Earth being energy efficient was given priority over the ability to kill anything that comes within several yards of you. Also nothing has super abilities. Super fast animals generally have terrible endurance, animals with good vision fall behind in other senses, animals that can last long without food and water fall behind in strength. On earth it's a tradeoff. On Pandora it seems everything has been supercharged.

[_Omaticaya_]

You also sort of have to ask why Pandora is a "deathworld". Why evolve to that point? Evolutionary arms race? Here on Earth being energy efficient was given priority over the ability to kill anything that comes within several yards of you. Also nothing has super abilities. Super fast animals generally have terrible endurance, animals with good vision fall behind in other senses, animals that can last long without food and water fall behind in strength. On earth it's a tradeoff. On Pandora it seems everything has been supercharged.

Man everything you write is awesome :nsmile: This concept you're explaining here^ is so true, I totally agree, and I always recollect it to Neytiri's phrase, when she says "Eywa protects just the balance of life", in my opinion, it's also about this idea, EVERY single species on Earth, has their strong and weak points, and together they create an eternal balanced cycle, of life, and death, and it works on forever, as it has worked fine for millenia, BUT humans must learn that Nature leads it's own Way, "The wealth of this world is all around us, we need to understand that". I do, Ximphron does, many others here do, but not enough... :nsad: I see you Ximphron :nwink:

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

the Na'vi were actually intended to be a "MarySue Race" as you put it.


i do not like the bent of this 'marysue' comparison to the Na'vi,as a lot of what i have read on the reference is geared more to races which use technology,metals,and things outside their natural enviroment,and a lot of the writings on this 'marysue' race stuff,tend to be somewhat negative or slanted in favor of bias towards races with inherent flaws or 'weaknesses'. the Na'vi exist and co-exist quite well within their natural surroundings,but maybe wouldn't do so well on another world,another gravity,a different ecosystem,anything along those lines,so that would rule out the 'marysue' comparison,as those types are supposed to be 'perfect' in any enviroment. anyways,the whole comparison is pointless anyway,as the Na'vi are a truly unique People,and are in a class by themselves,far removed from some feeble human explanations.


Team Omaticaya forever!!! :inlove:

[Ximphron]

From what I understood a "mary sue race" is simply one that seems unquestionably better in comparison to other species. Like elves in many fantasy worlds. I didn't think it went farther than that, like going into other environments.
I was under the impression that JC made the Na'vi purposefully "better" than humans. Could be wrong.

It is true that the Na'vi would likely not do so well on other worlds.
If you put a Na'vi on earth, he or she might have trouble walking, might be gasping for air in the thin atmosphere, might be scared of there being no bioluminescence. Everything is best suited to its own planet.

[DeMouse]

I would say that the Na'vi legitimatly invoke MarySuetopia
Mary Suetopia - Television Tropes & Idioms (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySuetopia)

But I think that it was never intended for the species itself to be stronger than it should be. It is the differences that should be brought on by the differing environments that I am trying to explore in this thread. I'm not saying that humans or Na'vi are better. I'm just trying to identify the differences. The reason I started with stating the human stregnths over na'vi is because the movie already explores all the areas where Na'vi have the advantage by being set in their home environment.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

I was under the impression that JC made the Na'vi purposefully "better" than humans.



well,the Na'vi are better than humanity,because they know they are a part of their surroundings,and that all energy and spirits are connected and dependent on each and every link in the chain...it is the Way. :inlove:



we seem to have willfully and deliberately forgotten that...

[DeMouse]

Spirits are a pagan concept which basically refer to the forces of nature.

We havn't willfully and dilliberately forgotten anything. The rise of the abrahamic religions are what stamped out nature-worship in the western world. That is all three of them, not just christianity (although the Catholic church is most responsible for stamping out paganism). The more science adavances the more we re-learn about the importance of out surroundings. They weren't called the Dark Ages for nothing, we forgot alot over that period. When we started re-learning we jsut went for the industrial progress forst. The modern re-invigoration of naturalism is due to human progress. It was the Dark Age regression, not the rise of industry, that caused our apathy for the environment.

I will say however that the very same environmental apathy was part of the reason that we were able to develop our industry to the modren level, and now we have enough technology to be able to continue using that industry without consuming all of our planets resorces. It will just take some time to put it all into practice.

[_Omaticaya_]

now we have enough technology to be able to continue using that industry without consuming all of our planets resorces. It will just take some time to put it all into practice.

35017

[DeMouse]

35017

w/e

Guess I'm the open-minded optimist after all.

We have the science. We just need to engineering.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

the Omaticayans lived in a giant Hometree for damn near 20,000 years,and their culture and community flourished. science and human engineering helped destroy it...you can keep them.



i want teylu and a nice spot under the firefly lanterns,to the left of the firepit. :inlove:

[DeMouse]

the Omaticayans lived in a giant Hometree for damn near 20,000 years,and their culture and community flourished. science and human engineering helped destroy it...you can keep them.



i want teylu and a nice spot under the firefly lanterns,to the left of the firepit. :inlove:

20,000 years in the same place doing the same things with no change or improvement.

If thats not stagnation, nothing is.

I guess we are in agreement. You can have stagnation, I'll take progress. We'll see who is still around when our sun runs out of fuel.

[Ximphron]

20,000 years in the same place doing the same things with no change or improvement.

If thats not stagnation, nothing is.

I guess we are in agreement. You can have stagnation, I'll take progress. We'll see who is still around when our sun runs out of fuel.

Technological advancement is not synonymous with improvement. I would not say most individuals are any better off now than they would be 20,000 years ago.
In this modern world we work harder and deal with countless more complications than your primitive person.

I personally am not worrying about the sun. It's running out of fuel is billions of years away. Considering all the things that have gone extinct and flourished in the even shorter time earth has carried life, i'm not even sure we'll reach that point. Also, everything must come to an end.

[DeMouse]

Technological advancement is not synonymous with improvement. I would not say most individuals are any better off now than they would be 20,000 years ago.
In this modern world we work harder and deal with countless more complications than your primitive person.

I personally am not worrying about the sun. It's running out of fuel is billions of years away. Considering all the things that have gone extinct and flourished in the even shorter time earth has carried life, i'm not even sure we'll reach that point. Also, everything must come to an end.

We spend our time worrying about lots of complicated things because we no longer have to worry about a few all-consuming simple things. Namely getting enough food to survive and not being killed by predators or bandits. As we solve problems we invent new ones for ourselves. That does not mean that life has not been improved.

[Tsyal Makto]

Ximphron is right. Comparatively, aboriginal peoples do work less than modern humans. It is a common misconception that they spend all their time trying to survive. In reality, they only spend several hours a day hunting, gathering, and doing chores. The rest of the time is spent doing social activities.

[DeMouse]

Ximphron is right. Comparatively, aboriginal peoples do work less than modern humans. It is a common misconception that they spend all their time trying to survive. In reality, they only spend several hours a day hunting, gathering, and doing chores. The rest of the time is spent doing social activities.

And what do you think we are doing right now if not social activites?

We are doing it with people from all over the world instead of just our tiny tribe too.

[Tsyal Makto]

But our working hours have increased, and in general, our stress levels.

[DeMouse]

But our working hours have increased, and in general, our stress levels.

That is a left-over societal issue from the period where industrialisation first started. We don't need the number of working hours we have. That is why working hours are starting to go down as more and more people swtich to part-time employment. Look at the statistics and you would see that this is happening.

[Tsyal Makto]

But does that decrease in employment hours result in the same standard of living, or is it a quant way of hiding unemployment in the economic crisis? If it's the former, good for us, then, but I doubt we'll ever get to aboriginal working levels (3-4 hours a day max, and tbh in the aboriginal mindset "work" isn't even a grudgingly laborious task as it is represented in modern civ) unless you somehow get a Venus Project-style society (which is actually also quite "back to the land" and working with nature in it's layout) of complete automation, but I doubt that. The 1% status quo that gets rich off of our work and consumption will never allow it. However, I still don't believe we are somehow "better" than aboriginal people's. Every society has its strengths and weaknesses. They still have us on overall physical/mental health. Problems only seem to befall them when development is pushed, as Survival International does a good job of illustrating.

[DeMouse]

In most modern western nations (so not the U.S.) social welfare means that many people can afford a deacent standard of living while doing NO work at all.

[Ximphron]

People on welfare survive off of the work that other people do though. Work is stil done, money and food don't just magically appear for them at government command.

You also choose to look mostly at people of our own standing, in developed, western nations.
Most of the worlds population lives in the 3rd world and is extremely poor in comparison.

[DeMouse]

People on welfare survive off of the work that other people do though. Work is stil done, money and food don't just magically appear for them at government command.

You also choose to look mostly at people of our own standing, in developed, western nations.
Most of the worlds population lives in the 3rd world and is extremely poor in comparison.

That is an issue because of unbalanced progress. Medical technology without the society advancing enough to know not to breed indicriminantly. Contraception would save more lives in africa than aid packages ever could.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

But our working hours have increased, and in general, our stress levels.


agreed...and our taxes,citizen obligations,prices,fees,and traffic hours spent getting to and from that working hours job. :/

[HufweMakto]

You also sort of have to ask why Pandora is a "deathworld". Why evolve to that point? Evolutionary arms race? Here on Earth being energy efficient was given priority over the ability to kill anything that comes within several yards of you. Also nothing has super abilities. Super fast animals generally have terrible endurance, animals with good vision fall behind in other senses, animals that can last long without food and water fall behind in strength. On earth it's a tradeoff. On Pandora it seems everything has been supercharged.

Funny you should point out "energy efficient". It's that main idea that makes me think the whole Kardashev Scale is absolute BS when it comes to understanding "advanced civilzations". Civilzation is not controlled by basis of enegery consumption, if it's going to be measured by anything, it would be by Robert Zurbin's view, most probably by how much it spreads or maybe how efficiently it uses it's energy in contrast to how much it uses it.

[HufweMakto]

the Omaticayans lived in a giant Hometree for damn near 20,000 years,and their culture and community flourished. science and human engineering helped destroy it...you can keep them.



i want teylu and a nice spot under the firefly lanterns,to the left of the firepit. :inlove:

I'll have to disagree... Human greed and ignorance destroyed the hometree.

[DeMouse]

I'll have to disagree... Human greed and ignorance destroyed the hometree.

This. Especially the ignorance part.

It is never wise to choose ignorance. Which is where my railing against nihlism comes from.

[_Omaticaya_]

I'll have to disagree... Human greed and ignorance destroyed the hometree.

I agree Hufwe, you're right, but I also agree as J'ak said, that in a way science influenced and contributed to such catastrophic damage that the rda caused on Pandora, which could not have been done in such speed and devastating impact without machines ike the Valkyrie and Scorpion helis, as usual it's the rethorical 'It's not what it is that makes it bad, but how it's used'... Simply I believe there are many reasons that brought Hometree to be destroyed, just as much bad ideals that the rda people led by Quaritch beheld to operate in such Evilness...

[Ximphron]

Funny you should point out "energy efficient". It's that main idea that makes me think the whole Kardashev Scale is absolute BS when it comes to understanding "advanced civilzations". Civilzation is not controlled by basis of enegery consumption, if it's going to be measured by anything, it would be by Robert Zurbin's view, most probably by how much it spreads or maybe how efficiently it uses it's energy in contrast to how much it uses it.

I'd have to agree. Although I was just pointing out energy efficiency on in evolution, which seems to be a lacking factor on Pandora, everything there seems to have gotten super-abilities for no reason at all other than to have an evolutionary arms race, ignoring the need to be energy efficient.

@ Omaticaya.
Science gave the means to destroy the hometree but not the motive or the decision.
It's like the quote "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

[louielouie11224]

@ Omaticaya.
Science gave the means to destroy the hometree but not the motive or the decision.
It's like the quote "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

I love that quote!

[_Omaticaya_]

@ Omaticaya.
Science gave the means to destroy the hometree but not the motive or the decision.
It's like the quote "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

If you read my post, that's what I wrote by the way...=_=


'It's not what it is that makes it bad, but how it's used'

Yes, I didn't write it the Fancy way with the guns, guess it wasn't clear enough...

[Druless]

And also, we're descended from great apes, such as chimpanzees, and from what I know chimpanzees are more at home on the forest floor than in the treetops, though they are known in climb up trees. Gorillas don't neccesarily climb trees either. Monkeys are another evolutionary branch, but we're not directly related to them. And as for a fact, there are monkey species that don't neccesarily take to trees either, and mainly forage on the ground.

Okay, I have a question: If we are all descendants of apes and monkeys, than why on Earth are there still apes and monkeys on Earth? Wouldn't they have all just evolved into us? Even if they reproduced while not completely human, nor ape(somewhere in between), wouldn't they have just continued evolving from there, like their ancestors and/or descendants, whichever? According to evolution, they should've, am I right? Please explain.

[DeMouse]

no you are not right.

This is because the other Great Apes are not out ancestors. Theya re our cousins. Way back when, the common ancestor of all the Great Apes (Humans, Chimps, Gorillas... and there is one other. Orangitans I think.) was divided into different geographic locations. From there the different evolitionary paths started to diverge into the modern forms.

Thats it succinctly.

In video form

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh0F4FBLJRE

[Druless]

I'm wrong than? I was just going by what HM was saying and asking a question.
So then, you're saying that HufweMakto is wrong as well, seeing as he said we're descended from apes, chimpanzees, etc. and you believe we and the apes are just cousins. Two believers in evolution who can't agree on the same thing won't convince me that we evolved from monkeys or whatever for a second. If you're not a believer in evolution and I just misunderstood your position on the matter, than my bad for the comment from before. Still, I don't often agree with even scientists, because apparently, if science can't prove it, than it's impossible and all the other stuff some of those guys say nowadays.
As for me, I believe man was created by God, who took one of Adam's ribs to create Eve and we started out from there. Genetically speaking, I guess it is verifiable that we are SIMILAR to apes and such, but I do not think similarities automatically make us cousins. That just what I feel about it. Other people, like probably you, will feel different. You have the right to believe that.
Besides, how did this thread become about evolution? It started out just as a comparison between Na'vi and humans, and how they could or couldn't be like the other in this way and that way. We know these kinds of discussions always end up in an argument, so if people just want to talk about that from now on, than this thread is already dead.

[Ximphron]

@Omaticaya
Sorry, I'll read more carefully next time. I see what you meant now.

@Druless
Just think of it as a family tree: Both you and your cousin share an ancestor, just as chimps and humans share and ancestor in evolution, its just much, much farther back. I think it became a thread on evolution because myself, DeMouse, and some others enjoy discussing that area.

[_Omaticaya_]

I see you Druless :nsmile: So nice to See another Believer once in a while... Yet you'll have a hard time with these guys and girls... You keep doing your thing mate, good job :nwink:

@Ximphron, No worries man.

[DeMouse]

I'm wrong than? I was just going by what HM was saying and asking a question.
So then, you're saying that HufweMakto is wrong as well, seeing as he said we're descended from apes, chimpanzees, etc. and you believe we and the apes are just cousins. Two believers in evolution who can't agree on the same thing won't convince me that we evolved from monkeys or whatever for a second. If you're not a believer in evolution and I just misunderstood your position on the matter, than my bad for the comment from before. Still, I don't often agree with even scientists, because apparently, if science can't prove it, than it's impossible and all the other stuff some of those guys say nowadays.
As for me, I believe man was created by God, who took one of Adam's ribs to create Eve and we started out from there. Genetically speaking, I guess it is verifiable that we are SIMILAR to apes and such, but I do not think similarities automatically make us cousins. That just what I feel about it. Other people, like probably you, will feel different. You have the right to believe that.
Besides, how did this thread become about evolution? It started out just as a comparison between Na'vi and humans, and how they could or couldn't be like the other in this way and that way. We know these kinds of discussions always end up in an argument, so if people just want to talk about that from now on, than this thread is already dead.

You turned it into an evolution thread yourself. We were having an enjoyable discussion about the attributes of different species and how they might have developed that way and then you decided to get in the way of the discussion with your religious beliefs.

If you want to draw the not agreeing with each other card on evolution then I get to draw the not agreeing card on creationism. The muslim creation myth disagrees with the Pagan creation myths disagrees with the gree creation myth disagrees with the roman creation myth disagrees with the aztec creation myth disagrees with the egyption creation myth. Even under a single religion not all christian sub-groups agree on the christian creation myth. See mormans.

Out of the scientific and religious viewpoints only one of the two tries to claim that it has absolute truth, and its not science.

If you wish to take this further make a reply post in the pre-existing thread discussing evolution isntead of wrecking a good thread about the development of different species by trying to impose your dogma.

[Druless]

Wow, who pissed in your cereal this morning?
Ya'know, I actually dreamed last night someone would throw that out there about religion, but I'm not going to start on that, because there are ALWAYS people out there who just jump at the chance to hate on us. Out of all of my post, I say one little thing about God and you go berserk, like a rabid dog. I'm not going to give you the pleasure of an argument on that. I'm not going to stoop down to your level, cuz than you'll beat me with your experience.

And no, I didn't start the evolution thing. That quote I replied to was on the first freaking page of this thread. It was the first post that said anything about evolution. Go see for yourself. You lost that argument right there, pal. Btw, HufweMakto, I'm not trying to hate on you for what you said, I was just curious.

In response to the two view points, if you look back at what I said, I said 'other stuff that SOME of those guys say nowadays.' I'm not hatin' on all science. Except chemistry, that kicked my butt in school. :P Besides, like I said, everyone has their right to believe in what they want.

IMPOSING MY DOGMA? I was just asking a legitimate question, DeMouse. Get that stick out of your butt and chill out. That's all my first post ever was, A QUESTION, because there were some things about what was said that was unclear to me. I then just gave my thoughts on the whole thing, like you all did.

And no, since my simple question was answered, I have no desire to go to an evolution thread and talk there, where there are probably more people like you with short-tempers or just hate in your hearts. To stop this from getting further out of hand, this is the last post I'll make about this subject.

@Ximphron, thanks for politely answering my question, and not try to stab me in the face through the post. :D

[DeMouse]

Wow, who pissed in your cereal this morning?
Ya'know, I actually dreamed last night someone would throw that out there about religion, but I'm not going to start on that, because there are ALWAYS people out there who just jump at the chance to hate on us. Out of all of my post, I say one little thing about God and you go berserk, like a rabid dog. I'm not going to give you the pleasure of an argument on that. I'm not going to stoop down to your level, cuz than you'll beat me with your experience.
And no, I didn't start the evolution thing. That quote I replied to was on the first freaking page of this thread. It was the first post that said anything about evolution. Go see for yourself. You lost that argument right there, pal. Btw, HufweMakto, I'm not trying to hate on you for what you said, I was just curious.
In response to the two view points, if you look back at what I said, I said 'other stuff that SOME of those guys say nowadays.' I'm not hatin' on all science. Except chemistry, that kicked my butt in school. :P Besides, like I said, everyone has their right to believe in what they want.
IMPOSING MY DOGMA? I was just asking a legitimate question, DeMouse. Get that stick out of your butt and chill out. That's all my first post ever was, A QUESTION, because there were some things about what was said that was unclear to me. I then just gave my thoughts on the whole thing, like you all did.
And no, since my simple question was answered, I have no desire to go to an evolution thread and talk there, where there are probably more people like you with short-tempers or just hate in your hearts.
@Ximphron, thanks for politely answering my question, and not try to stab me in the face through the post. :D



Your post came across as exceddingly arrogant to me, not to mention I have given up trying to show any respect for creationism. All that happens if you do that is they throw it back in your face in my experience.


As for just asking a question. If you will only read your own post.


I'm wrong than? I was just going by what HM was saying and asking a question.
So then, you're saying that HufweMakto is wrong as well, seeing as he said we're descended from apes, chimpanzees, etc. and you believe we and the apes are just cousins. Two believers in evolution who can't agree on the same thing won't convince me that we evolved from monkeys or whatever for a second. If you're not a believer in evolution and I just misunderstood your position on the matter, than my bad for the comment from before. Still, I don't often agree with even scientists, because apparently, if science can't prove it, than it's impossible and all the other stuff some of those guys say nowadays.
As for me, I believe man was created by God, who took one of Adam's ribs to create Eve and we started out from there. Genetically speaking, I guess it is verifiable that we are SIMILAR to apes and such, but I do not think similarities automatically make us cousins. That just what I feel about it. Other people, like probably you, will feel different. You have the right to believe that.
Besides, how did this thread become about evolution? It started out just as a comparison between Na'vi and humans, and how they could or couldn't be like the other in this way and that way. We know these kinds of discussions always end up in an argument, so if people just want to talk about that from now on, than this thread is already dead.

I see two questions there. "Am I wrong then?" and "how did this thread become about evolution?" both of which I answered but I'll do it more prescisely then.


To "Am I wrong then?"
yes you are, but it is a common misconception even amongst people who accept evolution (Note I don't use the term "Evolutionist" because that term means somone who studies evolution professionally). Apes are our cousins, not our ancestors.

To "How did this thread become about evolution?"
You turned it into one by saying things whose only purpose was to argue against evolution, as opposed to contunuing the discussion about the differenciation of species (That is, you pulled the "you guys can't even agree" card). Evolutuion is a neccessary part of this thread as it is a very usefull tool for understanding why different species have certain attributes. If you want to come at this from a creationist standpoint that is fine, but don't attack evolution, just present the alternate viewpoitn without justifying it. To justify it head on over to the Evolutionism thread in the debate board and make your case there.

The need to constantly justify your drivel by attacking the best justified scientific theory we currently have is what I railed against, not the question you posted. Which you would know if you had noticed the difference in tone between that post and my previous one.

[Druless]

I know I said that I would end it with my last post, but when people try to call me things I'm not, that's crossing the line. I've been called alot of things, but being called arrogant is a first.

Dangit, man, I wasn't justifying it. What proof do you have of that? I did exactly what I said in the last post. I gave my opinion. I did nothing after that to 'justify' it. That single sentence was all I said about it.
Yeah, I noticed a difference in your tone alright. The first one, I'll admit, it was blunt, but sound. The next one, you sounded more hostile. Maybe not to you, but it did.
Besides, I don't like to assume, like you did by saying I'm just posting to argue that point. There's a saying, assume makes an a$$ out of you and me. Let me say this clearly. YOU. DO. NOT. KNOW. ME. I'm not the person that actively seeks out posts to argue about. That first post was strictly a question. Geez, I'm having to repeat myself here. Everything I said was out of curiosity, but you can't accept that. You think I'm out to squash all other beliefs.

[DeMouse]

I know I said that I would end it with my last post, but when people try to call me things I'm not, that's crossing the line. I've been called alot of things, but being called arrogant is a first.

Dangit, man, I wasn't justifying it. What proof do you have of that? I did exactly what I said in the last post. I gave my opinion. I did nothing after that to 'justify' it. That single sentence was all I said about it.
Yeah, I noticed a difference in your tone alright. The first one, I'll admit, it was blunt, but sound. The next one, you sounded more hostile. Maybe not to you, but it did.
Besides, I don't like to assume, like you did by saying I'm just posting to argue that point. There's a saying, assume makes an a$$ out of you and me. Let me say this clearly. YOU. DO. NOT. KNOW. ME. I'm not the person that actively seeks out posts to argue about. That first post was strictly a question. Geez, I'm having to repeat myself here. Everything I said was out of curiosity, but you can't accept that. You think I'm out to squash all other beliefs.


I don't know you but I know alot of crationists. If I re-gathered all information about everyone then I would still be here asking questions before making posting my first opinion on this forum. Assumptions are how we view the world. The wise just know when to recognise that their previous assumptions are wrong.

Anyway. Lets break down the post in question to figure out exactly what you said shall we?



I'm wrong than? I was just going by what HM was saying and asking a question.

Already done this one.



So then, you're saying that HufweMakto is wrong as well, seeing as he said we're descended from apes, chimpanzees, etc. and you believe we and the apes are just cousins. Two believers in evolution who can't agree on the same thing won't convince me that we evolved from monkeys or whatever for a second.


and now YOU bring up convincing you about evolution but saying nothing we say will convince you. I was simply answering a direct question before this.

This is where my accusation of arrogance comes from too. Only somone supremely arrogant would assume they have all the relevant information on somthing already, and only somone with all the information can make the claim to know anything for absolute certain.




If you're not a believer in evolution and I just misunderstood your position on the matter, than my bad for the comment from before. Still, I don't often agree with even scientists, because apparently, if science can't prove it, than it's impossible and all the other stuff some of those guys say nowadays.

Talking about the validity of science.

Oh and for the record good science says that we can't find evidence for it then there is no reason to believe it. Not that it's impossible.




As for me, I believe man was created by God, who took one of Adam's ribs to create Eve and we started out from there. Genetically speaking, I guess it is verifiable that we are SIMILAR to apes and such, but I do not think similarities automatically make us cousins. That just what I feel about it. Other people, like probably you, will feel different. You have the right to believe that.


Talking about the accuracy of evolutionary theory without adding anything to this thread's point of discussion. Can you understand why I would take this as simply a post against evolution instead of about anything or a legitimate attempt to get more knowledge about evoloutionary theory? You had already stated that we won't be able to convince you which further adds to the impression that you are up for a fight about this stuff. Most creationists I know always tack on that extra fluff and bluser about having the right to believe what you want.... and then go on to beat you over the head with scripture.


Besides, how did this thread become about evolution? It started out just as a comparison between Na'vi and humans, and how they could or couldn't be like the other in this way and that way. We know these kinds of discussions always end up in an argument, so if people just want to talk about that from now on, than this thread is already dead.


already handled this one.


Understand now?

[Druless]

Yeah, I understand where you are coming from. I can see how you would think that I'm supremely arrogant.

Let me just go ahead and say, I am not surpremely arrogant because I know I don't everything. Nobody can know everything. To think one would claim that would be crazy.

Still, my third quote that you've got in that post, I was guessing, seeking affirmation from what you said. Plus, what I said about trying to convince me, that wasn't anything but just a thought. There's no hidden meaning behind it.

Also, the quote where after you wrote, 'talking about the validity of science,' it had a bit of sarcasm in it. But it's a fact that not all science is valid. The think that it is actually being supremely arrogant.

And what's the big deal about adding fluff? Believe it if you want to, or not, but I said that respectfully. You read that right? I was showing yours and other people's beliefs some respect.

Question: Why did you add to that fifth quote of mine? I never said that beginning part. What's the big deal? I don't go editing your quotes before I go post it.

[DeMouse]

err, sorry that line just got mixed up into your quote by my post, i've fixed it.

that was supposed to be in my part.

[Druless]

Well, since we both seemed to have chilled out, wanna just end this and call it a truce? I don't know about you, but I'm just tired of this topic, no offense.
I'll admit I did help bring this topic up again, but that was just cause I had an honest question. Saying the results of said question were starting to get outta hand would have been an understatement. So whaddaya say?

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

it's a fact that not all science is valid.


yes sir,that is a spot on statement. :) and yes,we can add evolution to that list of invalid and thoroughly unprovable sciences. a lot of so-called 'science' only exists for tenure grants and the egos of ascot-wearing talkingheads of the university academia.


35476

[DeMouse]

yes sir,that is a spot on statement. :) and yes,we can add evolution to that list of invalid and thoroughly unprovable sciences. a lot of so-called 'science' only exists for tenure grants and the egos of ascot-wearing talkingheads of the university academia.

I am litterally shook with rage at reading that. Not even joking.

If you are trolling me then 10/10 and I would rage again.

The theory of Evolution has more evidence and is better proven than the theory of a round earth.

When approached objectively without religious preferences getting in the way it is the ONLY valid explanation for the diversity of life on our planet.

It could be wrong, but then it is also possible that the earth is flat and that my keyboard is just a pile of jello.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

but then it is also possible that my keyboard is just a pile of jello.


yup :)

35480

[Ximphron]

Does anyone still believe in a flat earth? Because that's just idiotic. The ancient egyptians knew the earth was round for gods sake, and if you look at maps made in 1400, they depict the Earth as round...

DeMouse, your keyboard is composed of the same subatomic particles as jello, they're just arranged completely differently. So sure!

To me evolution seems like the most obvious thing in the world but I guess that's not the case for everyone.

[DeMouse]

The Flat Earth Society - Index (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/)

Yes. Yes they do.

[Ja'k Dawsiin]

i read a few of the posts on the flat earth site,and my IQ just took a sharp tumble........yowza!!! holy crap,there are some stupid humans out there,lol

35488

[prowler]

Wait.. The planet isnt flat?? *rolleyes*

[_Omaticaya_]

^LOL

That forum is crazy yo... It Must be a joke. You seen the usernames hahahaha, it's quite fun tho' XD

[Ximphron]

The Flat Earth Society - Index (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/)

Yes. Yes they do.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=35TbGjt-weA

[HufweMakto]

If that's not crazy enough, there's still people who believe the Earth is hollow too: Hollow Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_Earth)

As for the following:

@Druless: As a matter of fact, we share a lot of our DNA with chimpanzees, 99.9%. The fact is, we are RELATED to chimps and other great apes, but we did not evolve from chimpanzees, but from an ansestor similar to chimpanzees and other great apes. I always find it illogical that people will say "Oh so we descended from apes, then why are there apes still around, tho?"

*sighs*

Evolution is exactly a straight line; that's why is often called a "tree" rather than let's say, a stick. Many families branch off from one another, which is why you have species that are specialized to exploit certain food sources (like hummingbirds taking in nectar or Darwin's Moth, which you have to google up to believe), or environments (like how well adapted polar bears are to the Arctic). Believe it or not, a lot of animals like finches all seperated from a species, yet some of that species still retains original characteristics. You can see that in finches most perfectly; the ones that inhabit the Galapogoes have divided into different species to exploit the most common food source, while other traits have dimineshed. But we know they are finches because they have the originator species from the mainland to study; sometime in the past finches were swept away by storms to these distant islands where they had to survive. I just don't get how people don't get evolution; it seems perfectly logical that a species learns how to adapt to it's environment and food supplies.

Also, I'm a lady. Who likes science. And that's not bad at all.

Also, try to keep things on topic, please.

[Druless]

Well, hey, it was a simple question that got answered in a way that lead to another question, that led to an argument. I'M SORRY.

[HufweMakto]

Well, hey, it was a simple question that got answered in a way that lead to another question, that led to an argument. I'M SORRY.

Apology accepted.

[DeMouse]

I was just revisiting this old thread and saw this but again.



"I think the biggest evolutionary difference is that we are naturally endurance hunters and trackers, while the na'vi are ambush predators."
-- This seems very likely based on speculation, but theres no confirmation. I think Na'vi are likely less predatory than humans, but theres no proof of that either. Its just that humans can take down animals without weapons, but I don't see how Na'vi could do that as they don't seem dangerous enough to ambush effectively without weapons. This could be due to eywaregulation though.


It made me think that perhaps due to Ewyaregulation (I love the term by the way) the Na'vi developed with weapons (namely bows) in mind, unlike humans who did most of our development before we started making tools.

[Porthos1]

**Necropost Alert**

Eywaregulation…nice.

Ximphron’s original thought would be true if the whole moon of Pandora was jungle. I do not see the Na’vi as wimps; they are highly athletic, strong and have extreme endurance. They are natural hunters and trackers; we see this in Jake’s learning montage. They were smart enough to develop tools, utilize other species (for transport).

I do not believe that Eywa has regulated their weapon development. It is more likely that since balance is the key element on Pandora, weapons more lethal than what we are shown would not be required. If the threat to the Na’vi were greater than hunting and gathering activities with an occasional rumble in the jungle with another clan, then maybe a more lethal set of weapons would be used.

[DeMouse]

The more power you have behind each movement the less movements you can make with the same energy expenditure.

Since the planet is lower gravity than earth they might have the same efficency of motion as humans do over long distance as it might not take much more power to move the larger body under the lower gravity. But if that is the case then they would have about the same strength as us too.

The movie appeared to portray them as being at least twice as phiscally strong as a human, therefore they must have a lower capacity for long-term endurance.

I also noticed a distinct lack of body fat. Humans naturally use body fat as a long-term energy storage mechanism. more evidence that they are designed for an environment of abundance, where they would not need to travel long disances in order to get food. As such it is safe to assume that on foot in an open plain a human would be able to travel a much greater distance without needing to rest.

[Porthos1]

True, good points. It could also mean that they have a unique metabolism that could be different than the human model that may not be applicable on Pandora. My comments are based on what we saw in the movie. There was a brief comment by Jake in the montage about, “My feet are getting tougher. I can run farther every day,” and the fact that Jake and company practically sprint up to Iknimaya. Even at lower gravity and more strength, that looked like a marathon.

[allrock123]

No. They must have terrible night vision. Neytiri needed to douse jake's fire in order to get the bioluminscence back up and running in order to even find her way back home. Without the bioluminescence I believe that the na'vi would be almost blind at night time. Even with torches.

Its quite a posability Neytiri Doused Jakes Torch because it was drawing the focus of the very light sensitive Viper wolves (unless there senses can also hone in on the torches heat it't quite a posabilty they can see infrared heat sources) she commits on how Jakes actions where at fault for there death.
Pandora's night bioluminscence many meen the Na'Vi eyesight (Which is feline based) my have evolved to be sensitive to the blue spectrum of light.
the light from Jakes Torch (Plus its infrared heat) may have drawn the pack of night hunting viper wolves to him like a moth to a flame.

[Porthos1]

^Agree! The torch could have drawn other unwanted visitors as well. "Hello, I am a baby, come and eat me!" I am not sure Neytiri was complimenting Jake on his choice of illumination in that scene!

"You're ghostin' us, mother#$ker. I don't care who you are back in the world, you give away our position one more time, I'll bleed ya, real quiet. Live here. Got that?" Mac, Predator