so you believe that we had achieved our present physical
condition on the basis of evolution? a single-celled thingy
started a few hundred million years ago worked its way finally to
humanhood?
Hey let's talk about something smaller, an organ of a body and
see if it could have logically taken that evolution route. If you
were to take any part of the eye the retina for example, it does
not work. the lens or the cornea? blindness. for the eye to see,
all parts must be functional and or course present. that in in
itself is a strong argument for design am i right?
i go into another direction, we take the concept back into the
evolutionary chain. somewhere along the way, a creature making its
way to humanity would have had to begin having an eye. the eye
could not have evolved because there is nothing that would have
caused a creature to begin forming a sightless eye. Since the
evolutionary theory says changes come about because of adaptation,
tell me what could have caused an eyeless thing to will a useless
eye into its head? how would it ever know that it would need an eye
that could see?
An eye could either see or it can't and there is no reason for a
creature to develop a partial eye just so it could become a seeing
eye later. So where did the eye begin? Randomly or by design?
Actually the core idea of evolution is that which
random traits would favour the particular hunting environment
and whether you are able to breed enough to absorb losses through
diseases, famine or outright conflict.
You are assuming that evolution is pyramid shaped, meaning all
beings will evolve towards the same pinnacle - that of the
human paradigm.
Omnivores, for example are not reliant on whether there are
herbivores to feed on and thus enjoy a higher and
more flexible energy consumption. Also, the human trait of not
having any mating period allows us to keep on multiplying,
absorbing losses through natural disasters and lack
of food.
I recently read this interesting article by a Chinese
scholar.
Female apes - Our closest cousins did
not develop breasts until they are pregnant. So why do
human females do? The simple answer is that the first
female human that developed breasts without pregnancy gave the
false illusion that she is fertile (since she has the visible
traits of having been pregnant) and thus attracted more
males to mate with her. This created a snowball effect where her
descendants would inherit the traits and be more attractive towards
males, even if they were from different tribes.
I do not believe that evolution neccessarily works towards a
singular grand design. The idea of a singular grand design is
indicative of the human brain's limitations and does not
fully demostrates the wonders of Evolution.
Evolution works on a "just enough" basis. It doesn't bother
about being perfection. Our body is basically a vassal
for the gene and its Primary Imperative is to multiply itself,
it doesn't really know what traits is best for its
current environment but that particular winning trait would
manifest itself in a few generations.
That is why the winner for eating competitions aren't the
150 kilo behemoth, but sometimes the petite 50-65
kg woman.
I believe human evolution is coming to a
crossroads. We are descendants of traits that value
high consumption and increased breeding. That conflicts with
physical limits of resources, are we going to obey our Prime
Imperative of High Consumption until our numbers are
decimated ?
Has the traits that made us progressed thus
far going to be our Achilles Heel?
Are we smarter than Yeast (I would recommend to read
about this experiment if you're free)?
