The earth was created by GOD and HE alone dictates how things develop! If HE doesn't want the lions to become jumbo-sized cat beasts, then HE won't make it so!
Evolution... ??? Pah... !!!
... been watching stuff about lions, gorillas, baboons and deer and these type of animals have the dominant male mate exclusively with a group of
females.
Now to be the dominant male usually means it is the one that is biggest and strongest so you would expect his offspring to have some of the
characteristics i.e. big and strong.
So when the dominant is deposed, it would be by another bigger and stronger male than him and so on.
Can you see where this is going?
Basically, they have been at it for millions of years so why aren't those animals the size of dinosaurs and bigger as the offrsping woulld tend
to increase in size unless evolution is flawed.
Because the female doesn't have to be biggest or best so good genes are diluted.
And also too big needs too many resources.
Also new male doesn't have to be bigger than old - just younger and hence faster and fitter and more desperate to get to the females.
Oh - and people hunt the biggest and best for trophies so they don't last long enough to impact on species.
[Edited on 1/5/10 by Ivan]
What on earth are you on about man???
The earth was created by GOD and HE alone dictates how things develop! If HE doesn't want the lions to become jumbo-sized cat beasts, then HE
won't make it so!
Evolution... ??? Pah... !!!
Like a lot of things in science, evolution is a theory, as such there are parts of it that can have holes picked in it.
Only that it gets stated as a fact all the time that people dont want to question any aspect of it, in case they get called "thick" or a
"creationist".
Same is true of lots of theories, the popular ones get heralded as facts by lay people and the media.
I am led to believe there is a species of bird in South Africa, where the females select a male on the size of his tail feather. Hence little baby
birds with longer and longer tail feathers.
Until they stop being able to fly and start becoming food for something else.
Bigger is not necessarily better.
Having a good chat up line is important.
[Edited on 1/5/10 by Macbeast]
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
So when the dominant is deposed, it would be by another bigger and stronger male than him and so on.
And sometimes even the freaks get lucky
Natural selection works on more than just sexual selection (as implied by Guinness) a bigger animal needs a lot more food and will starve in bad years giving the smaller males an advantage.
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
Like a lot of things in science, evolution is a theory, as such there are parts of it that can have holes picked in it.
As someone said before, it's not just about being big and mean, it's about food supplies etc.
Still like the old Bill Hicks take on creationists
Evolution is a theory as much as gravity is. I don't look to an old book of stories to tell me why my arse is on the sofa.
'Survival of the fittest', doesn't mean the strongest, as in physically fit. It means fittest to suvive in the current circumstances.
That's why little mammals suvived when big agressive dinosaurs didn't.
scudderfish; Your arse is on the sofa because it's comfy.
Thereforer , because we like them and look after them, sofas will survive.
[Edited on 2/5/10 by Confused but excited.]
My theory is that Dawkins would be in less hot water everywhere he goes, if he didn't declare himself to be an atheist.
hmmm, I see your points about biggest is not bestest .... but most animals, maybe not the nutjob males, would size up themselves against an oponent
before considering a fight - so they would need to be comparable in size.
the availability of food would mean the smaller beasties that need to eat less are favoured but still, over millions of millions of years, I still
would have expected the size to increase.
quote:
Originally posted by RK
My theory is that Dawkins would be in less hot water everywhere he goes, if he didn't declare himself to be an atheist.
Couldn't have put it better if I'd tried!
Ed.
We were created by aliens.
End of
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cd36WJ79z4
quote:
Originally posted by Simon
I reckon most people are atheist, they just don't realise it. They're too busy enjoying the pressies at xmas, the chocolate at easter but they don't bother with church the rest of the year.
I meant exactly what I wrote. But thanks for trying to tell me what I meant....
quote:
Originally posted by cd.thomson
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
Like a lot of things in science, evolution is a theory, as such there are parts of it that can have holes picked in it.
you're using the wrong definition of theory I'm afraid bud. A scientific theory is a general priniciple which summarises a body of empirical evidence. I.e. its a way of grouping facts.
"The Sun will rise tomorrow" is a scientific theory. "The Earth is spherical" is a scientific theory.
A theory is the most factual something can be without being pure maths.
The definition you're using is from philosophy where it means "speculation" and in noway relates to scientific theories.
To clear up the misunderstandings you're clearly having I recommend you read the new Dawkins, "The Greatest Show on Earth".
I agree with you Dangle, it is a theory, it is Darwin's theory of evolution, not the philosopy or speculation of evolution!
Darwins ideas fit very well with the definition of theory, I see no better word to describe what they are.
I also agree that you could pick holes in it but while there are areas that are not yet understood you dont hear many scientists that are taken
seriously doubting the theory, that's because they think it's pretty much right.
I think there are huge holes in darwins theory.
I agreee with evolution as some thing that happens in life we can see it all around us
but
if darwin was correct where are the in betweens by that i mean half monkey half human surly no one can believe that evolution just decided that we
have humans we can stop the monkeys from evolving.
As for religion i dont have the time to start on that subject apart from what a load of BS.
but all in all, live and let live and if it makes your life more enjoyable crack on
quote:
Originally posted by YQUSTA
if darwin was correct where are the in betweens by that i mean half monkey half human surly no one can believe that evolution just decided that we have humans we can stop the monkeys from evolving.
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
Like a lot of things in science, evolution is a theory, as such there are parts of it that can have holes picked in it.
Only that it gets stated as a fact all the time that people dont want to question any aspect of it, in case they get called "thick" or a "creationist".
Same is true of lots of theories, the popular ones get heralded as facts by lay people and the media.
[Edited on 8/5/10 by jeffw]
i do think there are some massive unexplained bits in evolution, that all scientists seem to gloss over. Most quoted example is the eye, which has countless genes to make it, but would need them all to work. There would be a selection pressure against half an eye.
quote:
Originally posted by cd.thomson
quote:
Originally posted by YQUSTA
if darwin was correct where are the in betweens by that i mean half monkey half human surly no one can believe that evolution just decided that we have humans we can stop the monkeys from evolving.
you assume that humans are more "evolved" than monkeys just because we're intelligent.
In truth a monkey in a zoo and you have evolved equal amounts from its nearest common ancestor.
We didnt evolve from the animals you see around you. Stand in an imaginary line with your father on your right hand side, and his father on his right hand side and so on and so on. Then have a separate imaginary line with a chimpanzee and all its fathers and fathers fathers. Eventually you will reach a point where there is an individual who is a father for both lineages.
that is evolution.. you don't expect or need "middlemen" in between the animals that are currently alive.
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
i do think there are some massive unexplained bits in evolution, that all scientists seem to gloss over. Most quoted example is the eye, which has countless genes to make it, but would need them all to work. There would be a selection pressure against half an eye.
yqusta, Nottingham probably shouldn't have given me a degree on the subject then !
If you could see evolution then you would see the imaginary lines of individuals I've described. That is just what evolution is.
If you understand that concept then why would you expect there to be links between modern humans and modern chimpanzees that are alive at the same
time? There is a link, it lived thousands of years ago and you can see it's fossils in a nearby natural history museum
Amen... er, I mean right on!
quote:
Originally posted by cd.thomson
A key point too is that the eye is RUBBISH.
Did anyone see the C4 series where they dissected an elephant, a whale & a giraffe? They showed how the nerve that controls the vocal cords (circa 6 inches from the giraffe brain), goes all the way down to the chest, around the heart and back up again. Doesn't matter if your a small fish, but it is poor design for a giraffe. However there is no evolutionary pressure to reroute the nerve so it stays following it's bizarre route.
quote:
Originally posted by cd.thomson
yqusta, Nottingham probably shouldn't have given me a degree on the subject then
If you could see evolution then you would see the imaginary lines of individuals I've described. That is just what evolution is.
If you understand that concept then why would you expect there to be links between modern humans and modern chimpanzees that are alive at the same time? There is a link, it lived thousands of years ago and you can see it's fossils in a nearby natural history museum
However, some points of view make sense, while others just really don't.
It's generally accepted that its not really possible to 'prove' any theory - it is only possible to disprove them. The ones that
stands up against common sense and proper scientific analysis generally become the accepted theories, and those that can be disproved or replaced by
something more sensible tend to disappear.
I remember those Faraday lectures showing some sea animal that still used an eye that was a few "steps" of evolution behind most of ours..
quote:
Originally posted by scudderfish
I don't look to an old book of stories to tell me why my arse is on the sofa.
