Author
|
Topic: Evolutionary Adaptation
|
Crue Knight
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 106 of 115 (326653)
06-26-2006 9:32 PM
|
|
|
Questions about Natural Selection
A couple of questions pops up when I think of the theory of natural selection: If the theory of natural selection were true, and only the stronger and the most fitting organism would promote itself, but the weaker dies, then wouldn't the earth's inhabitants lead itself towards destruction? This means the strongers will kill the weakers then we will all die. If the theory of natural selection is true, wouldn't we be able to survive another "big bang"? Since we keep getting stronger and more complex, we would be able to survive (Or at least some animal would)another crash since the organisms were weaker before?
Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End
Replies to this message: | | Message 109 by Coragyps, posted 06-26-2006 10:52 PM | | Crue Knight has replied |
|
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 760 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: 11-12-2002
|
Re: Heh
Why is it that when we dig a certain depth, then there is nothing but sedimentary rock? Say what???? Where do you get this non-fact?
|
AdminJar
Inactive Member
|
How things are done
Crue if you wish to challenge dating procedures then you will have to do that with scientific support. Creationist sites and assertions do not qualify as evidence.
And light from other planets millions-billions of light years away could be seen because God made this universe mature, just as the first human, Adam was mature. If you wish to argue that point you will need the scientific evidence to support it.
You should know better we believe the Bible was inspired by God. That is fine as a belief but it is not evidence. You are in one of the science forums, that means you must present scientific evidence.
|
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 760 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: 11-12-2002
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
and only the stronger and the most fitting organism would promote itself, That's "the organism better adapted to the current environment" that "promotes itself," or, rather, leaves offspring. Horseshoe crabs aren't known for their ferocity or cunning, but they survive and reproduce very nicely in their little niche. Tigers are famously fierce and strong, but as we take away their natural habitat, they'll all die out. "Strong" doesn't mean "fit" in biology.
If the theory of natural selection is true, wouldn't we be able to survive another "big bang"?
I presume you mean "mass extinction?" The last big one of those, at the end of the Cretaceous, killed off all the Big Strong Dinosaurs and left a bunch of rat-sized mammals. Big and Strong was the wrong thing to be 64,000,000 years ago, at least on land. The changed environment didn't leave big guys up on the surface enough food or shelter, apparently. If the mass extinction we humans are causing leads to enough depletion of our fellow organisms, we may go that way, too: the cockroaches, rats, and bacteria could take over this time.
|
Crue Knight
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 110 of 115 (327340)
06-28-2006 9:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 109 by Coragyps 06-26-2006 10:52 PM
|
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
That's "the organism better adapted to the current environment" that "promotes itself," or, rather, leaves offspring. Horseshoe crabs aren't known for their ferocity or cunning, but they survive and reproduce very nicely in their little niche. Tigers are famously fierce and strong, but as we take away their natural habitat, they'll all die out. "Strong" doesn't mean "fit" in biology.
But if thing get "better" or whatever...all other things will die out.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 109 by Coragyps, posted 06-26-2006 10:52 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|
anglagard
Member (Idle past 862 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: 03-18-2006
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
But if thing get "better" or whatever...all other things will die out. Unless one species adapts better real slow and other species counter-adapt real slow. If I understand what you are saying, that is.
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
But if thing get "better" or whatever...all other things will die out. All things do die out. Well over %99.9 of all the species that have ever existed are now extinct. Dying out is a fairly common thing in evolutionary history. Every species, eventually, becomes extinct.
|
NosyNed
Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: 04-04-2003
|
A Red Queen's Race
There is a techinical term for what goes on. A "red queen's race". It comes from, I think, "Alice Through the Looking Glass" where you have to run as fast as you can to stay where you are. This is what happens in evolution. Populations of prey and predators may both "improve" but they stay in about the same place relative to each other. Of course, they may not too and one may go extinct.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
But if thing get "better" or whatever...all other things will die out. Logical fallacy here. If one organism gets "better" adapted to its ecology (environment, predator-prey, competitions, etc) does not mean that suddenly all the other organisms are unfit. Behavior of other organsims will shift to adapt to the "new improved" model -- except of course, those completely unaffected by the change in the one organism. The fossil record is also flush with extinct species -- what are those except the evidence of "other things" dying out? Enjoy. Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
Crue Knight
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 115 of 115 (328490)
07-03-2006 10:12 AM
|
Reply to: Message 111 by anglagard 06-28-2006 9:58 PM
|
|
Re: Questions about Natural Selection
Unless one species adapts better real slow and other species counter-adapt real slow. If I understand what you are saying, that is.
Maybe I should have said, stop their line of evolution. Like if all the monkeys died (including us). But it seems as if we would be the ones who is more intelligent, so we would, and has the capability to destroy many lines of evolution.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 111 by anglagard, posted 06-28-2006 9:58 PM | | anglagard has not replied |
|