The difference of man and the music it makes

Do videos of birds 'dancing' in time to music tell us anything about the nature of music? Do they refute the idea music is a uniquely human phenomenon?

Quotes and comments;

A. 'Now that the ability to respond to music is found in another branch of animals, the puzzle is even greater. W. Tecumseh Fitch [in the same issue of Current Biology] said another theory about the evolution of music (that it was unique to humans) “bites the dust.” [1.]

- I sometimes wonder at the stupid things people say. (Yes; I've made some myself, but we won't get into that here; not on My blog :=)
How anyone can deny music is unique to human beings I don't know. The fact birds 'dance' in 'time' (apparently) to music doesn't refute this theory for several reasons I can think of off the top of my head.

a. The birds didn't create this music.
b. No animals produce music in the true sense of the word)
c. What the authors call 'dancing' isn't the same thing as human dancing.
d. We don't know why the birds do what they do... apparently the music triggers some instinctual response. (I don't know if the birds engage in behavior they don't otherwise engage in... but I doubt it.)
e. The music made by man (at its highest level at least) is concerned with beauty. Animals know nothing of beauty, and have no interest in it, or ability to appreciate it.
f. True music can involve words and music in an integrated manner; this is something beyond any animal.
g. True music (as opposed to the sounds and calls of animals)... is intellectual, creative and imaginative (not sounds made by rote). One could go on.

- The evolutionist explanation of bird sounds is one of survival and reproduction; that's all it can be from this point of view. Music made by human beings utterly transcends (even if it sometimes includes) such concerns. This the e. has to deny. If a bird could respond to the 'Messiah' by Handel, it wouldn't be responding to anything but the most banal elements in the score and in the production. It certainly wouldn't be aware this was about Jesus Christ, or about prophecy, Incarnation, Atonement, praise and worship.
As I've said many times on this blog, evolutionary theory can't account for anything that's uniquely human. All it can do (after a fashion) is give us possible stories on how various animal traits and behaviors might have emerged. The theory has virtually nothing to say about what is uniquely human; and therefore has no value when it comes to discussions about the uniquely human.

- If evolutionary theory can't explain music, I can't see that it has any right to comment upon it... or to deny it's a unique possession of human beings. [2.] I don't understand why evolutionists insist on denying the obvious. Can't they see that this eventually backfire on them?

To say music isn't unique to humans is like saying physics isn't unique to humans, or that literary theory isn't unique to humans. I get weary of all these absurd remarks made in the defense of Darwinism. If we're really interested in coming to the truth about our origins what does it profit us all to deny the obvious? How does this help us make any progress? (Creationists have had to eat a lot of crow; and I think it's time evolutionists did the same. i.e. many cherished ideas about Origins have bitten the dust on both sides, and intellectual integrity demands we acknowledge this, and stop pretending otherwise.)

Notes;
1. Quick picks; Creation/Evolution Headlines 05/28/2009
#10. Bird happy feet:
'Hilarious videos of birds dancing to the beat of rock music have been circulating on the net for awhile (see NPR and PhysOrg). Some of the videos were actually part of a serious science project. Harvard scientists were surprised to discover “Spontaneous Motor Entrainment to Music in Multiple Vocal Mimicking Species,” Current Biology reported.1 This uncovered a mystery, because “Why humans produce and enjoy music is an evolutionary puzzle.” Now that the ability to respond to music is found in another branch of animals, the puzzle is even greater. Why this should be surprising, since birds sing, was not explained. W. Tecumseh Fitch, though, in the same issue of Current Biology2 said another theory about the evolution of music (that it was unique to humans) “bites the dust.”
2. “Why humans produce and enjoy music is an evolutionary puzzle.” [see above]