Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Human Origins and Evolution ⇒

changes in modern man

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   changes in modern man
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 38 of 69 (418981)
08-31-2007 11:05 AM 		Reply to: Message 36 by Refpunk
08-31-2007 10:59 AM

Re: Response to off-topic comment
My analogy of the nazi's was showing precisely what happens when people try to play God and judge who's fit and who isn't. You are trying to do the same thing and are failing abysmally.
​
By your definition of fit, you are claiming that only those who have many children are fit. That means that the Bedouins in the Middle east and the people in areas of the world who do nothing but stay at home and have sex with each other are more fit than anyone else in the world. That argument is not only LUDICROUS AND JUDGMENTAL, but unbelievably ignorant as well. So until anyone here is interested in being objective and rational, then further conversation about this won't be productive.
​
You miss a very important point. Chiroptera did not decide who is fit. Actually, no one does. Fit and not fit can only be determined by looking backwards; those things that survived long enough to reproduce were fit. Those that did not were not fit.
​
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Refpunk, posted 08-31-2007 10:59 AM Refpunk has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Refpunk, posted 08-31-2007 11:10 AM jar has replied
  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 42 of 69 (418987)
08-31-2007 11:16 AM 		Reply to: Message 39 by Refpunk
08-31-2007 11:10 AM

Re: Response to off-topic comment
Actually, unless you can show why it is ludicrous and judgmental, you got nothing.
​
Fit and non-fit only relate to a population continuing. You are free of course to believe anything you want, but when discussing evolution, the only criteria that counts is whether or not the population passes through the filter of Natural Selection. Those populations that pass through the filter continue to exist. Those that do not become extinct.
​
It really is that simple.
​
AbE to address your added comment:
​
By your reasonin, then if a fit parent has 10 children and 3 of them die in a car accident, then the parent was unfit to begin with.
​
Not that is not at all what we are saying.
​
The parent was fit because he or she reproduced. The children however did not pass through the filter of Natural Selection.
​
BUT...
​
evolution does not deal with individuals but with populations so your example is irrelevant anyway.
​
Edited by jar, : No reason given.
​
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Refpunk, posted 08-31-2007 11:10 AM Refpunk has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Refpunk, posted 08-31-2007 11:32 AM jar has replied
  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 47 of 69 (418997)
08-31-2007 11:41 AM 		Reply to: Message 45 by Refpunk
08-31-2007 11:32 AM

on fit and non-fit
So you're saying that couples who opt not to have children are less fit than those who do nothing but have sex all day and breed children?
​
No, that is not what I said at all. You are still stuck at the individual level instead of the population level.
​
From an Evolutionary perspective, fit and non-fit only relate to whether or not the population reproduces and those critters live long enough to reproduce.
​
In your example, the couple that decides not to have children simply do not pass on their genetic material. Whatever unique genetic makeup they might posses is thus lost from the population.
​
You still seem to be looking on fit and non-fit as related to good or bad. They are not. It is only a matter of whether or not the critter lives long enough to reproduce and whether or not the population makes it through the filter of Natural Selection.
​
Edited by jar, : change a fitt to fit
​
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Refpunk, posted 08-31-2007 11:32 AM Refpunk has not replied
  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 53 of 69 (424819)
09-28-2007 7:43 PM 		Reply to: Message 52 by amex
09-28-2007 7:41 PM

Spam is spam
Whether you are spamming Christian sites or Islamic sites, spam is still spam.
​
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by amex, posted 09-28-2007 7:41 PM amex has not replied
  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 55 of 69 (434200)
11-14-2007 9:40 PM 		Reply to: Message 54 by Jason777
11-14-2007 9:34 PM

Sources please.
Scientific data has shown that some modern homo sapiens in isolated geographic areas still have the same brain capacity and facial features as homo erectus,neandratal and cro-magnon.
​
Sources and relevance please.
​
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Jason777, posted 11-14-2007 9:34 PM Jason777 has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024