Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisiblebadchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Cepheus]
    #21918461 - 07/09/15 08:35 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Cepheus said:


I know it is a completely redundant thought because it didn't happen, but if I was born in another country, or my mother lived somewhere remote without ready access to a doctor, I wouldn't exist.. If you play with the idea is does have an interesting outcome on evolution :wink:.




This is still a selection pressure, and I think you're spot on.

Nowadays, there are different selections that will shape humanity and "Select" for different things.  It used to be about physical size and strength, but I believe that is fading to favor intelligence.


--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge.  It is an indellible experience; it is forever known.  I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.

Smith, P.  Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.

...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.

Osmond, H.  Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Cepheus]
    #21918483 - 07/09/15 08:47 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Cepheus said:
Given that evolution is the current accepted model for explaining our origin, How do you think a cesarean section impacts evolution?

Survival of the fittest would and strongest would mean that any of the children that are born via C-section would not survive, neither would the mother. This is only a human phenomenon as obviously only humans have the capability to perform it...

Is this evolution?




Its survival of the fittest, not survival of the strongest.  Fitness is a measure of the organisms ability to propagate in its environment.  The fitness of an organism and its genes is a function of the environment.  In an environment where c-sections can happen and offspring born from one can still propagate then those organisms are indeed fit.

What does this imply about evolution?  It increases our genetic diversity.  Where as before the genes that would lead to a troubled birth would have trouble propagating now those genes can propagate easier.  They get selected into the pool rather than selected out of the pool. 

Also, humans have among the most difficult births of mammals largely due to the unfortunate combination of having large heads combined with narrow hips for walking upright.  This is a constraint on our head size.  With c-sections big headed kids that would have killed their mom can now be born and propagate.  Maybe the human head size will start to grow again... :lol:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shroomslip]
    #21918534 - 07/09/15 09:04 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Shroomslip said:
Natural selection in humans has been pretty much thrown completely out the window with medicine of all forms. It doesn't just stop at C-sections. Antibiotics, cancer treatments, surgery, immunizations etc etc. All the things that would in the eyes of natural selection make us inferior we can pretty easily overcome. More and more treatments are constantly added as well





intelligence is a part of natural selection and with that so is medicine

so, how about them pandas, they're too dumb to reproduce and should have died out decades ago


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Prisoner#1] * 1
    #21918638 - 07/09/15 09:38 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Prisoner#1 said:
so, how about them pandas, they're too dumb to reproduce and should have died out decades ago




There is no should, only what happened, what is and what may happen.  They haven't died out.  Its amazing, like you say.  They don't like mating, they only raise one baby at a time and did you know that they are carnivorous?  Well, they have the digestive tract and teeth of carnivores, yet they eat nutritionally void bamboo.  Talk about backing yourself into an evolutionary corner (ever read "Childhood's End"?).

But... They are cute and endeared to one of the most powerful species on the planet.  That should not be dismissed as silly or irrelevant.  Its a real advantage and its means their genes have a level of fitness in the current fitness landscape (environment).  And that is all that really matters, there is no right or wrong way to be fit with respect to natural selection.  There is no way it "should" be.  If their gene's propensity for cuteness allows them to garner resources from us and this can overcome their poor fitness with respect to mating and diet then they will propagate.  If not, then of course they wont.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Cepheus]
    #21918733 - 07/09/15 10:05 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Cepheus said:
For us to attempt to deconstruct any idea or thought about the physical universe we have to operate within the language we already understand, or at least the language that has the most empirical evidence in reality.



I agree, and that's exactly why I made my remark. Although a phrase such as 'correct direction' seems understandable, it doesn't seem to fit the evidence that we have about the nature of evolution. Nothing as far as we know points towards evolution having a specific goal or a pre-set path to follow. Hence, none of the possible directions (which are virtually infinite) can be correct or incorrect. Of course, the lack of evidence does not negate the possibility of such a directionality, so the best option would probably be to speak of medical advances changing the path of evolution - without going into the issue if this would be correct, desirable or just.

Quote:

Play with me here :wink:.



I would, but the Heisenberg thing makes be believe we may be playing different games on the same field, and we might not even be using the same ball :wink:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: koraks]
    #21919455 - 07/09/15 11:23 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

The engine of evolution is death before reproduction.  Our successful medical system has pretty much eliminated human physical evolution.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShiithead
Your Huckleberry
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 9,997
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: zappaisgod]
    #21920144 - 07/09/15 02:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Adaptation is an observable process and is a law.

Evolution is not law. It is a theory. This means there is not enough empirical evidence to draw an orderly and concise conclusion.

Theories are fine. But once you allow them to become part of your reality and the world we live in at large, people get confused and the truth goes out the window.

Social selection plays a big part in keeping the theory of evolution alive as a fact of life. But just because the majority or society for that matter says it is right, doesn't mean it is...


--------------------

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Psalm 12:6
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Revelation 3:11
Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: zappaisgod] * 1
    #21920956 - 07/09/15 05:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
The engine of evolution is death before reproduction.  Our successful medical system has pretty much eliminated human physical evolution.




No, this is wrong.  The engine of evolution is mutation and selection.  Human genetic diversity is increasing faster than ever.  Advances in medicine increases human evolution by increasing our genetic diversity.  Death before reproduction evolves genetic homogeneity, because fewer gene types reproduce.  Medical treatment allows genes that would be unfit in a different environment to be fit in our environment.  These genes add genetic diversity.  In both cases evolution continues, it never stops.  The only thing that changes is the rate and type of evolution.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121128132259.htm
http://www.wired.com/2007/12/humans-evolving/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution.html


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSirShroomsAlott
Howdy
I'm a teapot


Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 6,945
Loc: United States Flag
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shiithead]
    #21920992 - 07/09/15 05:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Shiithead said:
Adaptation is an observable process and is a law.

Evolution is not law. It is a theory. This means there is not enough empirical evidence to draw an orderly and concise conclusion.

Theories are fine. But once you allow them to become part of your reality and the world we live in at large, people get confused and the truth goes out the window.

Social selection plays a big part in keeping the theory of evolution alive as a fact of life. But just because the majority or society for that matter says it is right, doesn't mean it is...




Your comment confuses me. Adaptation means, a change or the process of change by which an organism or species becomes better suited to its environment.

You don't think over a period of a million years or longer that they can change enough to be totally unrecognizable from it's ancestor? I was under the impression that evolution is basically adaptation over a longer period of time, those who can adapt to different conditions survive and pass on the genes capable of surviving, when things change again they adapt again and those who survive and can adapt reproduce using those genes capable of doing so, and over the course of millions to billions of years and after enough adaptations something can "evolve" or has "evolved" into different types of animals and those billions of years of adaptations lead us to the species and life we know today, coupled with one species branching off in different directions, having the same species needing to adapt to survive two different climates, and many other factors such as this.

I'm not saying evolution is set in stone and that certain principles of it might be off, but as a whole it kind of makes sense to me :shrug:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePatlal
You ask too many questions
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa Flag
Last seen: 5 hours, 16 minutes
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Cepheus]
    #21921004 - 07/09/15 05:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Cepheus said:
Given that evolution is the current accepted model for explaining our origin, How do you think a cesarean section impacts evolution?

Survival of the fittest would and strongest would mean that any of the children that are born via C-section would not survive, neither would the mother. This is only a human phenomenon as obviously only humans have the capability to perform it...

Is this evolution?




Listen. Humans have beaten evolution long ago. Ever since that guy decide to eat the root of a plant to get rid of an ailment.

Right now humans are turning back the clock to make sure evolution has nothing on us.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: DieCommie]
    #21921268 - 07/09/15 06:38 PM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
The engine of evolution is death before reproduction.  Our successful medical system has pretty much eliminated human physical evolution.




No, this is wrong.  The engine of evolution is mutation and selection.  Human genetic diversity is increasing faster than ever.  Advances in medicine increases human evolution by increasing our genetic diversity.  Death before reproduction evolves genetic homogeneity, because fewer gene types reproduce.  Medical treatment allows genes that would be unfit in a different environment to be fit in our environment.  These genes add genetic diversity.  In both cases evolution continues, it never stops.  The only thing that changes is the rate and type of evolution.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121128132259.htm
http://www.wired.com/2007/12/humans-evolving/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution.html



If every member of a species reproduces how can it evolve?  Premature death is the engine of evolution.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShiithead
Your Huckleberry
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 9,997
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: SirShroomsAlott]
    #21923006 - 07/10/15 03:08 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

SirShroomsAlott said:

I'm not saying evolution is set in stone and that certain principles of it might be off, but as a whole it kind of makes sense to me :shrug:





If scientists are so confident in evolution why isn't it a law like gravity??

It is because there really is no hard observable evidence to support it. This is why science is awesome. It's the people that are pumping the "true enough evidence" into the mainstream science and laymen communities. They won't dare call it a law though because then they would actually have to present observable and mathematical evidence.


--------------------

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Psalm 12:6
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Revelation 3:11
Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shiithead]
    #21923012 - 07/10/15 03:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

This brings the question at what point sufficient evidence is presented for a hypothesis to be accepted as verified theory.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShiithead
Your Huckleberry
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 9,997
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: koraks]
    #21923023 - 07/10/15 03:23 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
This brings the question at what point sufficient evidence is presented for a hypothesis to be accepted as verified theory.




The only thing you need is math and empirical evidence drawn from that math or a simple observation could be enough.

But like I said, it's not what's true with the people teaching this stuff. It is what's true enough. To me, this is a problem.


--------------------

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Psalm 12:6
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Revelation 3:11
Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shiithead]
    #21923059 - 07/10/15 03:57 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

But how firm must the empirical evidence be? I understand your issue, but I want you to understand that it's hard to draw the line somewhere. One of the more popular definitions of knowledge is 'justified true belief' (Nonaka & Takeuchi). When is a belief justified and true? There are no absolutes when it comes to beliefs and ultimately, all or knowledge is in the end a set of beliefs. You have to choose at some point what you believe and what not. The line may be different for everyone.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShiithead
Your Huckleberry
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 9,997
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: koraks]
    #21923122 - 07/10/15 05:09 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Decoherence doesn't apply to the theory of evolution. There is no evidence of evolution. Period.

It is all speculation and wishful thinking. The line can be drawn if you want it to be drawn. If you wanna choose to live in a reality in which evolution is law, more power to you. But don't for a second think that it is based on empirical evidence.

Base it on a desire to be.

You will be more respected for your decision and more credible than one who lives in the reality in which evolution is law because the science books insinuate it so.


--------------------

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Psalm 12:6
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Revelation 3:11
Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: zappaisgod]
    #21923149 - 07/10/15 05:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
The engine of evolution is death before reproduction.  Our successful medical system has pretty much eliminated human physical evolution.




No, this is wrong.  The engine of evolution is mutation and selection.  Human genetic diversity is increasing faster than ever.  Advances in medicine increases human evolution by increasing our genetic diversity.  Death before reproduction evolves genetic homogeneity, because fewer gene types reproduce.  Medical treatment allows genes that would be unfit in a different environment to be fit in our environment.  These genes add genetic diversity.  In both cases evolution continues, it never stops.  The only thing that changes is the rate and type of evolution.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121128132259.htm
http://www.wired.com/2007/12/humans-evolving/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution.html



If every member of a species reproduces how can it evolve?  Premature death is the engine of evolution.




Mutation is how it evolves...  Every single member of a species can live past its fertility and you would still have evolution.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shiithead]
    #21923151 - 07/10/15 05:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Shiithead said:
There is no evidence of evolution. Period.



That's just nonsense. I'll gladly debate the matter, but you make it clear that there is no basis for debate with you. I respect your beliefs, but I think they're short sighted and that you misunderstand the meaning of the word 'evidence' (hint: not all evidence is by definition conclusive) and that you have a limited understanding of how science works.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGoldenEye
...
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/24/13
Posts: 4,340
Loc: Amsterdam
Last seen: 6 months, 19 days
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: koraks]
    #21923160 - 07/10/15 05:27 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

We are a "mangelwesen", google that and you'll have a nice theory on human evolution.

Mangelwesen is German and means as much as faulty creature. The theory says that we are so ill equiped to survive that we had to develop all kinds of tools and tricks to ensure our survival.

The fact that our brainy heads are too big to fit through a birth canal that has to be narrow because we walk upright fits this theory nicely.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: A thought on natural selection [Re: Shiithead] * 1
    #21923161 - 07/10/15 05:28 AM (8 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Shiithead said:
If scientists are so confident in evolution why isn't it a law like gravity??





Gravity is not a law.  Its the theory of gravity.  You are making the mistake of considering a theory to be a guess or hypothesis.  Its not.  Scientists are effectively just as confident in the theory of evolution as they are in the theory of gravity.  Each have holes, each need work, each are among the most successful theories man has ever devised.

The "law of gravity" is an equation.  Equations can be laws because they are always true under the axioms they are defined.  Its then the theory that makes the claim that the law describes our observations within some threshold.  With this in mind you can see that theories can contain many laws.  Newton's law of gravity (his equation) is part of the theory of gravity.  Einsteins field equation is also part of the theory.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Good Survival Tips
( 1 2 all )
YouEnjoyMyself 2,565 20 05/30/04 11:13 PM
by YouEnjoyMyself
* How to survive the coming economic collapse?
( 1 2 3 all )
the_phoenix 4,850 46 11/26/04 08:28 PM
by vampirism
* Re:evolution ShroomismM 1,321 12 11/23/04 11:57 AM
by usefulidiot
* HOW DID WE SURVIVE?
( 1 2 all )
Ripple 6,407 33 06/21/22 12:01 AM
by gamergod88
* Nature
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 3,091 28 05/24/04 11:32 AM
by Krishna
* Anyone trip to nature sounds? adamj 561 14 11/13/04 09:08 PM
by kadakuda
* Is compassion a part of human nature? Krishna 926 5 03/03/04 06:59 PM
by nicechrisman
* Natural antihistamine? Hendostan 768 3 11/19/04 06:03 AM
by lovelight

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
2,845 topic views. 4 members, 45 guests and 32 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 15 queries.