The mind and brain section of the August 2008 issue of Scientific American magazine carried a report “Animal Intelligence and the Evolution of the Human Mind” by Ursula Dicke and Gerard Roth. The claims made in the report, that ‘human intelligence is a slightly more developed form of the conceptual capacities of non-human primates as a result of evolution’ and that ‘intelligence had to emerge from a 1.5-kilo nervous circuit located inside our skulls’ reveal that the article was written with Darwinist and materialist preconceptions devoid of any scientific evidence.
Consciousness is one of the greatest dilemmas facing the theory of evolution. Since they are unable to bring any explanation to bear on the subject, evolutionists try to reduce consciousness and the soul to matter, of which they are in fact completely independent. To try to reduce the intelligence of human beings who found civilizations, research and invent things is as illogical and nonsensical as to claim that the quarks and electrons that comprise matter have intelligence, can think, decide and make judgments and can feel joy or sorrow. Evolutionists keep raising this issue in order to be able to keep Darwinism on its feet, despite its being a hollow philosophy which has been totally repudiated by the scientific facts. That is what Scientific American has done.
The error that human intelligence came about through evolution:
The article in question sought to adapt human intelligence to the fictitious scenario of evolution by comparing the human brain and that of different animals. Interestingly, however, Darwinists were not slow to personally submit various pieces of scientific evidence that refute their own claims.
The comparisons between human and various animal brains in the article actually refute the evolutionist scenarios attempting to be brought to bear on the evolution of the brain and the origin of human intelligence.
The reason for human intelligence cannot be that humans have the largest brains:
According to evolutionists, the brain should follow a direct course from simple nerve cells to the more complex. According to this imaginary scenario, brains should develop in size from small to large. And according to evolution, the most intelligent entities should have the largest brains. But observation has refuted this hypothesis.
Despite being the only conscious and most intelligent beings in nature, humans do not have the largest brains. There is no need for detailed research to appreciate this. Observations in nature have proved that intelligence has nothing to do with brain size. Some species of whale have brains weighing 8-9 kg and elephants have brains weighing 5 kg on average, both many times greater than the 1.5-kg human brain. This contradiction was also set out in the article.
This correct analysis in the paper in question of course totally contradicts the theory of evolution, which seeks to explain intelligence in terms of the supposed development of the brain from the primitive to the complex. Because if this evolutionist expectation were correct, then whales or elephants should be several times more intelligent than human beings. They should found more advanced civilizations that human beings, possess more highly developed technologies than they do, and be far ahead of them in art and science. Yet for millions of years, whales have always been whales and elephants have always been elephants. They have never demonstrated any development in culture, technology, science of art of the kind made by human beings. This is just one of those fundamental issues on which the lie of Darwinism has no explanation to offer.
In short, intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with brain size.
The reason for intelligence is not the number of nerve cells:
The article says that there is no correlation between intelligence and either special regions inside the brain or the number of brain cells in the outer layer of the brain (cortex). This is true, and the exact opposite of the theory of evolution. Because according to evolutionist expectations, the supposed evolution of the brain should take place from a very limited number of nerve cells toward the more complex, and since human beings are conscious and intelligent entities and the only ones with the ability to speak they should have the largest and most complex brains with the greatest numbers of nerve cells. The fact is, however, that this claim is refuted by the fact that whale and brain cells have a greater total of brain cells (neurons).
The speech center (Broca’s area) in the human brain is not unique to man:
Man is the only entity with the ability to speak. Human language is an extraordinary ability that cannot be explained by the imaginary requirements or mechanisms of the supposed process of evolution. The ability of some life forms such as parrots to repeat a few words goes no further than being mimicry.
Naturally enough, the years of research by Darwinists on apes in particular aimed at confirming the supposed evolution of language have always ended in disappointment. Noam Chomsky, regarded as the most eminent living linguist, criticizes these studies in the following terms:
Human language appears to be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal world “ 1
The position is very different when it comes to human beings. A child aged 2-3 begins talking without undergoing any training process and, what is more, in conformity with highly complex linguistic rules, in a manner that not even linguists can explain. It is clear that this did not come about through evolution, by chance.
David Premack from the University of Pennsylvania’s comment that “Human language is an embarrassment for evolutionary theory” 2 emphasizes this very well.
Another error in the article is the claim that is that human beings improved their intelligence by speaking and that this ability unique to human beings stems from the speech region of the brain known as Broca’s area. The attempt to reduce speech to a particular area of the brain or special combination of nerve cells is a materialist one, and American Scientist is mistaken. The fact is that:
The speech center in the brain known as Broca’s area is not only found in humans. Scientific research has revealed it is also present in monkeys. But unlike human beings, monkeys are unable to speak in any way. Some of these studies that reveal an area in monkeys similar to Broca’s area in human beings state:
“Brodmann’s area 44 delineates part of Broca’s area within the inferior frontal (front side of the brain) gyrus (curves of the brain) of the human brain and is a critical region for speech production, being larger in the left hemisphere than in the right1–4 — an asymmetry that has been correlated with language dominance. Here we show that there is a similar asymmetry in this area, also with left-hemisphere dominance, in three great ape species (Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus and Gorilla gorilla). (Asymmetric Broca’s area in great apes, Brief Communications Nature 414, 505 (29 November 2001)