ForumsWEPREvolution

175 88820
aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

Evolution!

People LOVE to "debate" evolution. But that's silly, and doesn't really solve anything. If you are in a debate about whether or not evolution is a valid theory, you are either debating someone who has little to no idea what what evolution is, or ARE the person who has little to no idea what evolution is. That doesn't sound like very much fun, so let's not do that, okay?

Instead, this thread will be about topics in evolution, because it is much more entertaining to talk about specific cases and ideas than one big overarching theory. The topics will be chosen by whoever has the best topic, with all "lesser" topics being ignored and forgotten.

Now, I'll start us off with what actually made me want to start this thread: randomness. I was reading Mage's post at the bottom of this thread, and immediately thought about genetic drift.

Here is a classic example of genetic drift in a fruit fly population:

Basically, genetic drift states that random sampling has a lot to do with the evolution of small populations. Think about it: say you have a population of four individuals, two males and two females. One female homozygous allele for blue fur, the others all have a homozygous allele for red fur. Mating between blue and red fur produces a heterzygous purple fur creature. We would therefore expect the next generation to have some purple and red individuals, and the one after that to have all three colors represented. Basic Mendelian stuff.

Now, it gets interesting. Lightening strikes the blue female. She's dead, and will never reproduce. Now, all individuals in this population will be forevermore purely red. Note that this is regardless of the fitness of these genes. Blue fur might have been much more beneficial (perhaps these creatures lived in blue grass, and it provided camouflage), due entirely to random events (as opposed to evolutionary pressures) it is RED fur that becomes fixed in the population.

Going back to and contradicting Mage's comment from before, due to genetic drift, having the same selective factors won't guarantee a particular evolutionary outcome, due to simple random events.

So.... Discuss?

  • 175 Replies
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,259 posts
Regent

my point is that i'm trying to prove that they live a more violent lifestyle than us humans. it also serve as a response to his comment that i quoted.

But all chimps do is defend/expand their territory. This is not more violent than what humans have done, and not more irrational.

In my opinion, "rational violence" is a violence that served a well thought purpose and in situations when the purpose itself can justify the action.

Like when a predator kills a prey, or when an animal defends itself?...

examples include a parent scolding their children when doing something wrong

Do you assume this doesn't happen in the animal kingdom? Not even in social animals where the adults raise the offsprings (in whatever configuration)?

it relates to a more complex consciousness because a rational violence is mostly well thought and planned by anything that planned it and not just emotionally driven

Emotional response =/= instinct based response.
FishPreferred
offline
FishPreferred
3,171 posts
Duke

Try this


Is this a definitive measure of logical thinking? No. It's a list of organisms by neuronal density. You're trying to prove that neuronal density is proportional to cognition, which is an insupportable claim, not that the density varies between species.

Try this, or this.


This #1 is the same as above, but using mass instead of neuron count. This #2 is unclear, because it doesn't seem to have any relation to what we're discussing. What are you trying to support with this article?

[quote]Haven't looked at Africa lately?


What's wrong with it?[/quote]

There are tribes in Africa that engage in wars and petty squabbles for dominance. What makes their "tribal warfare" any more rational?

So this is where the hotspot is. i don't mean that under-developed. by "under-developed", i mean primitive.


As I suspected. "Primitive", however, is equally incorrect. Organisms that exist today may have primitive vestigial features, but their brains are functional and modern. They are therefore not primitive. You could more easily argue that humans have more primitive brains than the laboratory fruit fly, because the flies go through more than 1000 recombinations for every single generation of humans.

So, why haven't i hear about it?


It isn't exactly nationwide headline material that a chimp can match up some coloured squares.

do you mean humans? as humans ARE animals in a way


I don't, and what do you mean "in a way"?

invertebrates and vertebrates is what i meant with most. Ants don't only have disputes with other colonies, they have dispute with a lot of animals there is, like the prey they eat, us humans, and termite colonies. don't forget anteaters too, as they prey on them. And please don't say that you assumed they used non-violent ways to deal with that.


1 You seem to be a bit confused about the meaning of violence. Eating is not an act of violence, nor is being eaten. Of course, if you think the process of killing another animal should qualify, we could discuss the violent and brutal butchering of millions of defenseless livestock animals on battery farms.
2 The only disputes with humans are when a human decides to completely destroy every individual of their colony for the sake of his/her own convenience.
3 "Oher colonies" includes termite colonies.

because i can find a lot of examples to make me believe they're behavior is irrational.


This is where the issue lies. You see their behaviour, but you do not understand it. Instead of taking the time to consider their goals, you just assume that there aren't any and that it is completely irrational.

take for example, chimp's "tribal warfare". as you have said yourself about "Organized warfare is the most extreme and irrational form of violence", and tribal warfare being a form of warfare and it was obviously organized, so why would it not be the most extreme and irrational form of violence like with the organized warfare?


Tribal warfare is not organized warfare. Organized warfare is when two political entities send hundreds of battle-trained soldiers in their stead to settle a dispute instead of coming to terms rationally.

in what way? what tools that they made that can rival a homo habilis or homo erectus creations in complexity?


The bent or broken twigs used by crows to hook or spear grubs, the clubs used by some parrots to drum on tree trunks, the stones used by otters to crack open mollusk shells, the straight twigs used by apes to collect ants and termites, and the bowers and nests made by myriad bird species are the first that come to mind.

1. a clam produces pearls by trapping anything that can irritate the organism, which would be equivalent to burying the foreign object ( the "anything&quot. is this not a form of "violence"?.


Those are oysters, but even in their case it is not an act of violence. The object, usually a tiny shell fragment or piece of grit, gets stuck between the shell plate and the oyster's unprotected flesh. It secretes a barrier of mucous which may eventually cause the formation of a pearl. It is not trapping anything, because the object is already stuck.

2. a gecko eats a lot of mosquitoes and small flying bugs and it does this everyday. isn't this a form of violence?


Eating is not violence. It is a necessity of life for most animal species.

3. a cricket in mating season would compete with each other. is this not a form of violence?


In what way is it even remotely violent? How is it more violent than American Idol?

From your argument that human ability at logic is not superior to most animals.


Not more â  less. Disbelief â  credulity.
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,442 posts
Jester

and what do you mean "in a way"?

I think he meant that when people say "animals", they're generally referring to the non-human kind, and was clarifying (or trying to) that that's what he meant.

Of course, if you think the process of killing another animal should qualify, we could discuss the violent and brutal butchering of millions of defenseless livestock animals on battery farms.

Not to mention the widespread use of insecticides and other toxins.

3 "Other colonies" includes termite colonies.

He likely thought that by "[Ants] only have disputes with other colonies", you meant specifically other ant colonies, not other insect colonies.

Instead of taking the time to consider their goals, you just assume that there aren't any and that it is completely irrational.

To further the point, there are tons of human goals that seem irrational as well, such as wasting time playing a video game or drawing a picture. These things don't (or barely) aid in survival, as opposed to the direct benefits of gathering food/water/supplies/mates/etc.

Organized warfare is when two political entities send hundreds of battle-trained soldiers in their stead to settle a dispute instead of coming to terms rationally.

That's infantry warfare, but ok.

In what way is it even remotely violent?

I think he was referring to congenital aggression, not the noisemaking.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Can a monkey or a chimp solve the Rubik's cube? can any animal find the solution to a lateral thinking puzzles? i know not all humans can solve either one, but there are some that can solve it, at the very least i'm on those list. so my point is proven


You mean like these?
Chimp Solves Puzzle Faster Than Most Humans
Enrichment Puzzle
Just to mix it up a bit.
Sookie Opens The Parrot's Treasure Chest by Foragewise
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,259 posts
Regent

These links relate to a discussion on evolution from another thread, put down here for the sake of further discussion.

- Evolution is a fact and a theory

- Random genetic drift
Keep in mind other processes are acting on evolution too; like developmental processes (phenotypic variation, developmental bias and more), whose relevance is being investigated.

- Observed instances of speciation

- Some more observed speciation events

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,259 posts
Regent

Again I have just read about something that I felt was worth reviving an old thread for.

The news is about animal-like 'eyes' in single-celled planktonic organisms (click here for a slightly more detailed article and here for the paper preview).

Eyes are light-sensitive structures that have evolved independently in several groups of organisms, like in vertebrates and molluscs for example. The complexity of the human eye has been erroneously used by creationists as an argument for intelligent design, even though we have a pretty good understanding of the steps that happened in the evolution of the eye. I don't intend to rehash the whole debate here, rather I want to talk about the recent paper.

The organisms the study analysed, planktonic dinoflagellates, have managed to develop an eye-like structure despite consisting of only one cell. Unlike our multicellular eye, this structure is composed of several types of organelles (like mitochondria). The study goes on about the different origins of the organelles, calling it a "chimaeric structure, incorporating organelles with different endosymbiotic histories. " And yet these light-sensitive ocelloids have a surprisingly analogue structure to our eyes. This is really a great example of convergence, going much further than, for instance, convergence of wings in birds, bats and pterosaurs.

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100921021913/spongebob/images/thumb/2/22/Sheldon_Plankton.svg/100px-Sheldon_Plankton.svg.png

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Interesting you would post something about an eye as I was trying to find information on unusual eyes last night. I was looking at an article on mutifocal lens systems that Some geckos and birds have, again a case of convergence there..

Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,507 posts
Jester

I heard something on moths which have developed primitive, but essential "ears" which can now pick up vibrations to help them survive against fast-swooping predators. However, I have a drink in my hand, and it makes it very hard for me to search information. SOS

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,132 posts
Jester

Bats and moths in the real world: neuronal responses as adaptations to predation

and somehow they still manage to hit me by accident.. xD (or is it a accident? maybe he tried to attack me... =o )
Showing 166-175 of 175