|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 22 From: Miraflores, Lima, Peru Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Darwinism Cannot Explain The Peacock | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
I once posted some similar articles that mentioned this unreliability of published science articles. Before I found these studies it had already occurred to me that this is almost certainly true-and yet completely circumspect studies continue to be part of mainstream beliefs (like that atomic clocks have been tested and proven to record different times, flying east to west as opposed to west to east).
In the age of Wikipedia this phenomenon has only become even more widespread, false believes have proliferated. One interesting thought, similar to the peacocks, that I have often thought about is, imagine if man never invented scissors or a razor. Men would be running around the woods with beards dragging four feet from their face, and their hair would be down to the ground, getting tangled up where ever they walked. And our fingernails and toenails would all get so long, they would break off and get all infected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
But Bluejay, don't you think that the whole notion of a cosmetic trait being an indication of an animals fitness, when the cosmetic trait itself is simply a measure of the cosmetic devices fitness, is in itself a pretty funny argument for evolution.
In other words, if you posses a trait which makes you appear more fit, regardless of whether or not it ACTUALLY made you more fit, or if it even made you less fit, but it can fool people, you will pass on that fake fitness indicator. The important feature becomes the fakery, not the real individuals health. I could think of hundreds of examples of this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Around the same time that straight hair became a trait of humans I guess.
When do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
What evidence do you have that a trainless peacock ever existed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Peacocks seem to believe otherwise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Your argument is circular. You can claim that any trait which is better suited for fitness will get passed on, but then if one asks why peacock trains would get passed on, you will say, well, because obviously it must be better suited for fitness.
That's the whole crux of the evolutionary theory in a nutshell.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
I see AZ, so any traits which are prevalent in a population, are by definition examples of better fitness which have been passed on. I get it, I get it.
Like cancer, and cystic fibrosis, and aging... Cool theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Nonukes, you have to take this up with azpaul. He is convinced that the definition of a better fitness trait is one that gets passed on through generations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined:
|
I see.
Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given. Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
What is the evolutionary advantage of a big full bushy beard covering up a man's entire face? It has been sexually selected for?
Or hair growing all the way down your back?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Me (and possibly you) would have a big full beard covering up our face and hair down at least to our butts, if we didn't cut it off all the time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Sometimes its important to point out how inconsistent your sides ideas are; and just asking simple questions is often enough to do just that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
Razd,
Are you ever able to see, however subtly, how much your side needs to spin every problem in evolution, so that somehow it makes sense to your theory? Your premise now is that there were these apes selecting females out there, one day long ago, and some had beards and some, through an odd mutation didn't and the ones who didn't have beards looked so much younger, so that the males felt they must simply be much younger apes, so I prefer having sex with these child-like woman-apes. There is just so much need to believe so many ludicrous propositions, all in one small idea: -This doesn't happen in other ape populations -Would a childlike looking ape be better to have a child with. -How would the male ape know that selecting a childlike ape would be a better choice. Because the ones who chose the less childlike looking ape was less successful at mating? -Why would the male apes who chose the ones that had more facial hair be less successful. -For a while in the development of humans there were much more heavily bearded woman, and less bearded woman, and the beardless ones won out. -Most ape lie creatures we see today don't have anything close to a moustache-beard kind of combination that men have. Do we need to create a story that says the chimpanzees decided to sexually select both males and females that look more like newborns? -Does the type of straight, long hair, which grows way down the backs of many Europeans and Asians have an resemblance at all to an ape like creatures way of growing hair? -Many Asian men have almost no facial hair, were they successful because they looked more childlike? If you are in Asia, its better to look childlike as a man, but if you are in Greece its much better to look like an old grizzly bear? Couldn't you really just make up any story at all RAZD, and anytime there were inconsistencies in the story, just add another just so story into the mix to make it somehow look rational. Looking youthful is good for reproduction, looking old is good for reproduction, less hair is a sign of virility, more hair is a sign of virility, if you look short and fat it means you have better genes, if you look tall and thin it means you have better genes, beauty means you are more healthy, if a population survives by definition that is beautiful. Why are there ugly people, well because not all phenotypes are selected out. Are all traits that survive indications of fitness? Well yes, of course...except when they are not indications of fitness mind you. . ...it never ends RAZD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
quote: They don't because they don't have this coyote. I guess you were too busy looking at piles of old bones to look up and notice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bolder-dash Member (Idle past 3660 days) Posts: 983 From: China Joined: |
RAZD, Come on, have you thought this through any?
You are suggesting there was a time when all the females must have had significant facial hair, just like the men. Do you think this was when they were humans or when they were still some previous ape? Then some females got a mutation that lead to much less facial hair-which looks like a child (purely un-evidenced conjecture, but ok, let's go with your story). This can't be some kind of chimpanzee creature because basically none of them have facial hair. It also needs to be beard like hair that only occurs after adolescence, because otherwise the ones with the hairless face mutations wouldn't really seem childlike, they would seem sickly. And since you are suggesting that males prefer childlike mates, you must not believe males prefer large breasts and wide hips. Or do you have another story? Let's be honest here, huh, can't any story work? Strong woman, they are good for collecting firewood. Weak, they are more loyal. Big fat noses, they can smell poisons better. Small little noses, less risk of snoring and enticing lions....
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024