Evolution Debate ...

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
Dexter Sinister said:
Extrafire said:
They are most definitely the most successful organism on the planet. Since evolutionary theory believes that all other life descended from them, the question arises; why? Couldn’t be survival of the fittest, all other life is inferior when it comes to survivability. Is there any evolutionary advantage to any other lifeform over bacteria?

Your ignorance of evolutionary theory is vast and unassailable.

Hence the question.

You don't know either?

Often when reading articles or listening to programs on some unusual lifeform the question is asked how the particular trait presents an evolutionary advantage that would promote its developement, so it's a valid question.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Not really. A trait may be passed on and develop simply because it was also common to individuals who shared other traits that were advantangeous. Those seemingly non-advantageous traits may become indicators of a good mate over time and become advantageous because of that.
 

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
One person and an entire species is a completely different thing. Bye the bye... I don't believe in a creator or designer so how could I possibly attribute anthropomorphic qualities to a piece of fiction. I was merely responding to your belief of this fictional being.
I'm very aware that you don't believe in a creator/designer. But you posed a hypothetical question, and I answered it.

There is a frequent objection to creator/designer that you seem to have used, and that is that a creator wouldn't have made such an imperfect universe, world and beings, and wouldn't allow such bad things to happen to its creations. This objection is usually accompanied by statements that suggest that a creator would only make what amounted to paradise on earth. The problem with this conjecture is that assumptions are made that we know what the mind of a creator would be, and its benevolent purpose, and therefore this world could not have been created. But this position assumes that a creator would necessarily be a loving and benevolent god. It ain't necessarily so. Einstein was convinced by science that there was a "necessity for a beginning" and "the presence of a superior reasoning power" but was convinced it could not be the God of the bible or any god like it. In other words, the creator could have made us as an experiment and could care less. Or we might be a by-product, or side effect. As I've said, I'm arguing for a generic creator here, not getting into specifics of the identity of the creator.
 

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...

Reverend Blair said:
Not really. A trait may be passed on and develop simply because it was also common to individuals who shared other traits that were advantangeous. Those seemingly non-advantageous traits may become indicators of a good mate over time and become advantageous because of that.
That sounds more like the development of differing breeds. It might also be a reasonable description of a method whereby a new species of bacteria would evolve, but a trait that tended toward a "higher" lifeform would be detrimental.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
If it survives to reproduce, then a species passes its traits on. The tendency toward more complex lifeforms is inherent in that since complexity would have the effect of reducing predation, at least initially.
 

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...

Reverend Blair said:
If it survives to reproduce, then a species passes its traits on. The tendency toward more complex lifeforms is inherent in that since complexity would have the effect of reducing predation, at least initially.
But an organism with a detrimental trait would be less likely to survive to reproduce.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
Extrafire said:
You don't know either?

Yes I do, actually, but a proper explanation of all the issues you raised in that little paragraph about complexity and survival is book length. You might try Ernst Mayr's book, "What Evolution Is." It's a very good non-technical exposition of the evidence for evolution and the origins of and reasons for organic diversity.
 

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...

Reverend Blair said:
Yes, but complexity is not a detrimental trait.

If there is no evolution, how do you explain Flores Man?

Well, (and as Dexter says, I'm no expert) oft times when listening to the aformentioned programs the comment is made that such traits that do not confer an evolutionary advantage in themselves take resources from the organism and thus become excess baggage that is detrimental to survival. Since bacteria demonstrate vast capability to change and adapt in order to survive (a trait far beyond other organisms) while still remaining bacteria, any move away from bacteria would make them less likely to survive in detrimental circumstances.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Getting bigger and harder to attack is hardly excess baggage. You are also ignoring the fact that bacteria themselves are not as simple as the first forms were...they have evolved in order to take advantage of more complex lifeforms.
 

Sy

Electoral Member
May 17, 2005
146
0
16
Kingston, Ontario
Maybe...just maybe... BOTH ways of coming into being happened. The lackey's of society evolved from whatever bacteria and invertebrate lifeform millions of years ago...and the select few creatures that actually have purpose on this planet were gently placed onto this planet by an omni-present creator who understood that perfection of humankind couldn't happen without his input.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
I've gone about five years without finishing this, but WTF:


Inbred Gits and Pond Scum
A Theory on the Origins of Man



There is a new theory about the origin of man out there. It’s being talked about in the bars and the coffee shops and even the bingo palaces. It is a theory that may serve to unify the Creationists and the Darwinists once and for all. When David Suzuki was asked about it he said, “What the heck are you talking about?” Several of Darwin’s distant progeny said, “That’s nice, go away.”

The Pope could not be reached for comment but an e-mail response from the offices of Jimmy Swaggart said, “We won’t even comment on that, what do you take us for?” Stockwell Day was also contacted but his only response was to lay in a corner curled in the fetal position saying, “Nobody likes me,” over and over again.

The theory itself is this:
Many millions of years ago life began to evolve on the planet. It started as pond scum, then shore scum. Eventually it grew into dinosaurs but they were all blown up by a giant comet. Then mammals evolved. The mammals begat monkeys, the monkeys begat apes and the apes eventually evolved into hominids. The hominids’ brains kept growing and, over time, they became modern humans. Pond scum humans have large brains but because these brains are more suited to running antelope to death on the African Savannah than actually thinking they often have trouble with mundane tasks like driving or remembering to go to work. They will most likely evolve eventually though.

About 6,000 years ago, while the Pond Scum humans were out hunting and gathering, this old hippie came to earth. We don’t know where he came from but, there he was. He made a man through magic and called him Adam, then removed Adam’s rib and cloned Eve from it. Even though this cloning process meant that Adam and Eve were as genetically close as paternal twins, the Old Hippie encouraged them to breed.

Eventually the Old Hippie made Adam and Eve and their kids go live with the Pond Scum People. It seems that they were trying to learn for themselves and the old hippie, possibly in a cocaine rage, was having none of that. He gave them a book before they left though, and admonished them to live by it. They packed up the kids, who were also nieces and nephews, the grandkids, who were all first cousins, and the book and headed out into Pond Scum territory. When they first met the Pond Scum People they needed a name for themselves. “We can’t think of a name,” they said, “Possibly because we’re all our own cousins.” The Pond Scum People dubbed them the Inbred Gits.

The Inbred Gits lived fairly happily for a time. They had many adventures and sometimes got lost in the desert for long periods because the inbreeding was causing their brain cases to shrink, but they kept on trying and living by the book the old hippie had given them. They added their adventures to the blank pages in the back of the book so that when the old hippie came back they could tell him everything that had happened. In the meantime they tried to alleviate the brain case problem by trying to convince the Pond Scum People that there would be big trouble if they didn’t join up with the Inbred Gits. There were some pretty big gang-fights and a fair bit of smiting, but after a while the Pond Scum People agreed to disagree.

After a time, the Inbred Gits looked at the Pond Scum People and said, “Hey, those Pond Scum People are having a lot of fun. They have many different versions of the Old Hippie and get to have sex a lot.” Some of the Inbred Gits decided to be more like the Pond Scum people. They partied, drinking wine and imbibing in strange herbs until all hours, and discovered that there was more than one position to have sex in. They even started letting drum kits into their bands. Some of the more traditional Inbred Gits didn’t like this, preferring to have sex in only one position and finding the drum beat hard to dance to, so they stayed away from the Pond Scum people.

After a while the Old Hippie came back and looked around. He noticed that most of his people had wandered over into Pond Scum territory. “I know what the problem is here,” the Old Hippie said, “There isn’t enough inbreeding going on.”

The Old Hippie went to this guy named Noah and got him to build a really bitchin’ boat. This thing was huge. It had room for livestock and food and a half-dozen people or so. It was a cool party yacht but Noah wouldn’t allow anybody but his immediate relatives on because the Old Hippie told him that inbreeding was the key to salvation.

After the Party Yacht was built the Old Hippie hired some scientists from over in Pond Scum land to make it rain. They were incredibly successful and caused a huge flood. This was no big deal for the Pond Scum people, they were getting used to scientists trying to kill them, so they just took a road trip. The Inbred Gits didn’t like to travel though, and they didn’t believe that scientists would try to kill them, so they drowned. All except for Noah, he had the Party Yacht. He loaded all his animals and his sons and the women on the boat and sailed around for a month or so.

After a bit the rain stopped and the water drained into the ocean. Noah went back to having sex with his immediate relatives and the Pond Scum people got back from their road trip. All was right with the world...The Pond Scum went back to having wild parties and listening to cool music and the Inbred Gits looked at them and said,

“Those bastards only think they’re having fun.”
Things continued like this for quite some time with the Pond Scum people living happily and achieving many great things, like building huge monuments and inventing beer. The Inbred Gits were left to their own devices and did much begetting with their cousins.

One day the Old Hippie came back and did some begetting of his own. He sired a son with a young floozie and then disappeared.
 

manda

Council Member
Jul 3, 2005
2,007
0
36
swirling in the abyss of nowhere la
peapod said:
execute homosexuals! can you believe someone actually has the gall to even say such a thing :twisted: Bastards the whole lot :? :?

So we turn it around and demand that the people who say to excute homosexuals, be executed :lol: There are times when an eye for an eye is appropriate 8)
 

Extrafire

Council Member
Mar 31, 2005
1,300
14
38
Prince George, BC
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...

Reverend Blair said:
Getting bigger and harder to attack is hardly excess baggage. You are also ignoring the fact that bacteria themselves are not as simple as the first forms were...they have evolved in order to take advantage of more complex lifeforms.
Bigger and harder to attack would be an advantage, as long as it remained bacteria. Any change away from bacteria would lessen it’s ability to survive and adapt.

Even the simplest cell is enormously complex, and although the first cells might have been simpler, there is still a complexity threshold below which life won’t work. More complexity for a bacteria may well be advantageous, as long as it is still bacteria. But the question was not about complexity per se, but what’s the evolutionary advantage to becoming something other than bacteria?
 

Laika

Electoral Member
Apr 22, 2005
225
0
16
Where The Wild Things Are
Re: RE: Evolution Debate ...

Extrafire said:
But the question was not about complexity per se, but what’s the evolutionary advantage to becoming something other than bacteria?

To occupy a ecological niche that is either availble or to develop an edge over competition in the same niche.

Bacteria serve many functions and have a very important place in the food chain, but they also leave a lot of room into which other creatures may evolve.