2 questions about your theory of evolution

  • 73 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Half-Life_man
Half-Life_man

6302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#1 Half-Life_man
Member since 2006 • 6302 Posts

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

Avatar image for xxQuadropwnedxx
xxQuadropwnedxx

2201

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 xxQuadropwnedxx
Member since 2007 • 2201 Posts
1) Survival of the FIttest. When a spiecies is started, it has a certain set of traits. After generations these traits change in order to adapt to their surroundings. For example, if an animal needs to live in water and it is going extinc, the spiecies genetic makeup will altar to ajust. this takes decades and centuries to change. 2) who knows, probably just experiments.
Avatar image for MetallicaKings
MetallicaKings

4781

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3 MetallicaKings
Member since 2004 • 4781 Posts

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

Half-Life_man
1. big slugs dont adapt to this environment too well, I believe 2. Instinct
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

Half-Life_man
wow dude... do you think someone told animals how to have babies? it's natural to know what you're supposed to do.
Avatar image for nbtrap1212
nbtrap1212

1525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#5 nbtrap1212
Member since 2005 • 1525 Posts
[QUOTE="xxQuadropwnedxx"]1) Survival of the FIttest. When a spiecies is started, it has a certain set of traits. After generations these traits change in order to adapt to their surroundings. For example, if an animal needs to live in water and it is going extinc, the spiecies genetic makeup will altar to ajust. this takes decades and centuries to change. 2) who knows, probably just experiments.


So, in your opinion, who - or what - "starts a species"?
Avatar image for xxQuadropwnedxx
xxQuadropwnedxx

2201

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 xxQuadropwnedxx
Member since 2007 • 2201 Posts
idk, just a long chain of events beginning with the "bid boom" or whatever :)


[spoiler] 400 post [/spoiler]
Avatar image for FancyKetchup25
FancyKetchup25

3007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 FancyKetchup25
Member since 2006 • 3007 Posts
We know what we need because without those things we'd die, for instance if we had no lungs we would realise we needed them to breath.  the second question ties in with the first, sex is part of survival, and there is a sex drive for us to want to reproduce.  
Avatar image for 194197844077667059316682358889
194197844077667059316682358889

49173

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 194197844077667059316682358889
Member since 2003 • 49173 Posts
Evolution is not a directed process, but rather trial and error based upon random mutations. Those which produce better adaptation for a given environment make an organism more likely to reproduce and pass on those traits until they eventually crowd out comparable organisms who lack that trait or one of the subspecies changes environs. For your second question, sex is not generally engaged in for reproductive purposes in most species but because it is pleasurable. This represents an adaptation. Animals capable of enjoying the reproductive act were more prone to do so than those for whom it involved searing pain :)
Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#9 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts

1)Survival of the Fittest, like the other guy said. We don't even have a full grasp on how our bodies work yet, so I couldn't tell you. I can tell you that through evolution, certain things that aren't needed stay because they don't do any bad. Take Wisdom Teeth. This works with the theory of evolution being brought about by "trial and error" mutations.

Evolution, as Patrick Stewart put it, is a mutation.

Last I checked, facial hair is there to protect from the cold...so we do still need it.

2)The same way dogs do now, I presume. They sniffed around and then the hormones and subconscious mind did the rest.

Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
1.) Read up on your evolution theory. 2.) Instinct, just like other animals :|
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
1.) Read up on your evolution theory. 2.) Instinct, just like other animals :|
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
[QUOTE="xaos"]Evolution is not a directed process, but rather trial and error based upon random mutations. Those which produce better adaptation for a given environment make an organism more likely to reproduce and pass on those traits until they eventually crowd out comparable organisms who lack that trait or one of the subspecies changes environs. For your second question, sex is not generally engaged in for reproductive purposes in most species but because it is pleasurable. This represents an adaptation. Animals capable of enjoying the reproductive act were more prone to do so than those for whom it involved searing pain :)

actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction
Avatar image for nbtrap1212
nbtrap1212

1525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#13 nbtrap1212
Member since 2005 • 1525 Posts
idk, just a long chain of events beginning with the "bid boom" or whatever :)


[spoiler] 400 post [/spoiler]
xxQuadropwnedxx


It's actually called the "big bang." And what does that have to do with life and how and why life works the way it does?
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.
Avatar image for Half-Life_man
Half-Life_man

6302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#15 Half-Life_man
Member since 2006 • 6302 Posts

that still doesn't explain nails, hair, noses, even teeth. What realizes you need it and gives you the extra feature? There's nothing behind evolution *theory*, just things advancing and getting bigger and stuff. *not my belief btw*

Sorry if i sound like a noob

Avatar image for Loonie
Loonie

3455

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Loonie
Member since 2003 • 3455 Posts
If we were all slugs like you described then an animal would evolve to eat the slugs. The slugs would either have to adapt (i.e. be small slugs enabling them to hide easier) or get hunted to extinction.
Avatar image for Video_Game_King
Video_Game_King

27545

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 28

User Lists: 0

#17 Video_Game_King
Member since 2003 • 27545 Posts
For the first one, they don't need it, it's just that it was most likely a genetic mutation. And that was a skilled monkey, so it lived on to pass it's genes. And the second one is that all living things have certain commands automatically programmed into them. For example, I read that if you poke a baby in the cheek, it turns to that direction (something about guiding the mouth to the nipple during breastfeeding), and this sex thing is one of those.
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
[QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex

So?
Avatar image for yoshi-lnex
yoshi-lnex

5442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 yoshi-lnex
Member since 2007 • 5442 Posts

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

Half-Life_man

Basic idea behind surviaval of the fittest, becouse something like thumbs is benificial, a species with it is more liekly to survive and pass on it's genes, something unnessasary like facial hair is an example of a physical structure that was benificial to an ancestor but isn't any more. Through evolution, more benificial mutations, or genes already in the pool that are more benificial are more likely to be passed on.

Species may have some basic form of instinct, or may have simply learned from a parent.

Avatar image for drnick7
drnick7

995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 drnick7
Member since 2004 • 995 Posts
You should have paid attention in biology class.
Avatar image for Conjuration
Conjuration

3562

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#22 Conjuration
Member since 2006 • 3562 Posts

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

Half-Life_man


1)  Adaptation of a species to its surroundings is one theory that I have 2 points of view on.  One is that this happens the way scientists suggest it:  by the body recognises the animals physical needs, and passes the required traits to the offspring.  I think it's definately possible.  2nd, I also think it's possible that species don't necessarily adapt to their surroungs, but rather members of each group with a predisposition to their surroundings (not necessarily passed on through the parents) are the one's who ultimately survive and out-breed the "weaker" members of the species.

2)  I can't explain that one.  My first time, I didn't have any idea what to do...it just came naturally.  Seriously it's some sort of instinct, like breathing.
Avatar image for yoshi-lnex
yoshi-lnex

5442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 yoshi-lnex
Member since 2007 • 5442 Posts

that still doesn't explain nails, hair, noses, even teeth. What realizes you need it and gives you the extra feature? There's nothing behind evolution *theory*, just things advancing and getting bigger and stuff. *not my belief btw*

Sorry if i sound like a noob

Half-Life_man
Those mutations were benificial to the species at the time, so they were more likely to pass on thier genetics becouse they were more likely to survive in their enviroment.
Avatar image for Crucifier
Crucifier

7195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Crucifier
Member since 2002 • 7195 Posts

that still doesn't explain nails, hair, noses, even teeth. What realizes you need it and gives you the extra feature? There's nothing behind evolution *theory*, just things advancing and getting bigger and stuff. *not my belief btw*

Sorry if i sound like a noob

Half-Life_man
you dont really need nails or hair :/
Avatar image for Rekunta
Rekunta

8275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

#25 Rekunta
Member since 2002 • 8275 Posts

that still doesn't explain nails, hair, noses, even teeth. What realizes you need it and gives you the extra feature? There's nothing behind evolution *theory*, just things advancing and getting bigger and stuff. *not my belief btw*

Sorry if i sound like a noob

Half-Life_man

Nothing behind evolution theory?  That's a good laugh. 

Anyhow, nothing "realizes" you need adaptations to survive in a given environment.  There is no conscious decision of "Oh! This is gettin' outta date, better get on top of it!"  It's something adapting to it's environment over a long period of time.  Think of it like a large piece of clay with a weight on it.  Slowly the clay will start to adapt and yield to the pressure on top of it and will change shape and form, or adapt.  I know it's a lousy analogy to the complexities of evolution, but that's how I see it.

And what doesn't explain nails, hair, noses and teeth?

Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
[QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex

So?

your answer to my "sex is about reproduction no pleasure" post said "that's because those animals don't go through the mating rituals" so... that's kinda like you saying when animals try to get attention from someone of the opposite sex they're doing it for pure enjoyment... like they're just teases or something ......
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex

So?

your answer to my "sex is about reproduction no pleasure" post said "that's because those animals don't go through the mating rituals" so... that's kinda like you saying when animals try to get attention from someone of the opposite sex they're doing it for pure enjoyment... like they're just teases or something ......

I was talking about infertility, animals don't have sex with infertile animals because they don't go through mating rituals and thus don't display that they are ready and eager to mate.
Avatar image for Devouring_One
Devouring_One

32312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

#28 Devouring_One
Member since 2004 • 32312 Posts
[QUOTE="Half-Life_man"]

no this is not flaming but it not exactly accepting either. I have my beliefs and you have your, that's ok for right here.

1) How come things like thumbs on humans or facial hair grow when your species has a need for them. That's like wishing for more hair and it comes to you. Evolution has no god controlling it so how does the process recognize if you need something? We should all be large slugs with no hair and only a mouth to eat with and a hole to expel with

2) How did cavemen discover that putting object A into object B and rattling it around for a while produces more babies? That's like is you put your finger on a female's big toe and rubbing it (example), none of us would know to do that

also there is the discussion of where the atom that started this came from but that's for another time.

MetallicaKings
1. big slugs dont adapt to this environment too well, I believe 2. Instinct

yea. you dont just gain abilities. they always were there or were created by mutations and the favorable traits would be the one that survives while ones that cant adapt well would go extinct
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
[QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex

So?

your answer to my "sex is about reproduction no pleasure" post said "that's because those animals don't go through the mating rituals" so... that's kinda like you saying when animals try to get attention from someone of the opposite sex they're doing it for pure enjoyment... like they're just teases or something ......

I was talking about infertility, animals don't have sex with infertile animals because they don't go through mating rituals and thus don't display that they are ready and eager to mate.

females only show they're ready to mate when they're fertile..... you've basically just proved my point.
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#30 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="The360Wins"] actually i thought there were very few animals that have sex while the female wasn't fertile... proving that basically sex, in the animal kingdom, is all about reproduction

That's only because those animals don't go through the mating rituals.

mating rituals have nothing to do with the enjoyment of sex

So?

your answer to my "sex is about reproduction no pleasure" post said "that's because those animals don't go through the mating rituals" so... that's kinda like you saying when animals try to get attention from someone of the opposite sex they're doing it for pure enjoyment... like they're just teases or something ......

I was talking about infertility, animals don't have sex with infertile animals because they don't go through mating rituals and thus don't display that they are ready and eager to mate.

females only show they're ready to mate when they're fertile..... you've basically just proved my point.

You made it sound like that male animals wouldn't have sex with an infertile male because they then wouldn't be able to produce babies.
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
You made it sound like that male animals wouldn't have sex with an infertile male because they then wouldn't be able to produce babies.-Karayan-

no, no i didn't

Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#32 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts
I don't belive that man necessarily evolved from monkeys. I mean if that were true then there wouldn't be anymore right? there would be several types of humanlike creatures but no more monkeys right? That's just what I think. All monkeys would have evolved into something more.
Avatar image for Varese_basic
Varese_basic

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 Varese_basic
Member since 2002 • 6785 Posts
Humans do not have the certainty of instinct that animals have.
Avatar image for dangerflash
dangerflash

1889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 dangerflash
Member since 2004 • 1889 Posts
1) People are different, people in the cold parts of alaska can wilthstand the cold weather and their faces have adapted to not freeze in cold weather. I on the other hand could not withstand the cold because my body has not adapted to the cold conditions of alaska and it would take generations of my family to get adapted o it. 2) expirementation the same way we found out how to make engines or gather energy from the sun or creat a video game out of 1's and 0's
Avatar image for hellzhitman
hellzhitman

1512

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 hellzhitman
Member since 2006 • 1512 Posts
    I really don't get something.... and while this topic is up I might as well ask:  After the big bang, how owuld life have come into existence.  There was nothing there to create life or life to come from.  It was just the big bang, then the universe expanded.  This is my ultimate problem and why I still do not dismiss creation, scientists do not have an answer to this question.  They have a theory of how life evolves, etc but not where it initially came from.  Where would these laws be applied that by itself, a single celled amoeba is created.

    Don't call me a noob and immediately give me the :| face because I said I did not dismiss creation.  Remember, you did not come up with these theories and at their core, they are still just theories with not explanation to the very beginning of life.
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#36 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="-Karayan-"]You made it sound like that male animals wouldn't have sex with an infertile male because they then wouldn't be able to produce babies.The360Wins

no, no i didn't

Well that's how I interpreted what you said. Either way we are not really in disagreement.
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#37 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
I don't belive that man necessarily evolved from monkeys. I mean if that were true then there wouldn't be anymore right? there would be several types of humanlike creatures but no more monkeys right? That's just what I think. All monkeys would have evolved into something more.vickersfan
We share a common ancestor....
Avatar image for Burning_Shadow
Burning_Shadow

667

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#38 Burning_Shadow
Member since 2004 • 667 Posts
K theres 2 theories
1)The Charles Darwin Theory  says that we have adapted to fit out enviroment. Ex. if there are 3 different types of animals on a island, and all that island has to eat is cocunuts, the animal that can get in the tree and crack open the cocunut and eat it will survive well the rest starve to death and become extinct and the other one reproduces.
2) Bible Theory says..........God did it all
You decide what you wanna belive
2nd Question
I have no damn clue:)
Avatar image for The360Wins
The360Wins

272

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 The360Wins
Member since 2006 • 272 Posts
K theres 2 theories
1)The Charles Darwin Theory says that we have adapted to fit out enviroment. Ex. if there are 3 different types of animals on a island, and all that island has to eat is cocunuts, the animal that can get in the tree and crack open the cocunut and eat it will survive well the rest starve to death and become extinct and the other one reproduces.
2) Bible Theory says..........God did it all
You decide what you wanna belive
2nd Question
I have no damn clue:)
Burning_Shadow
or, the other two animals evolve to beat the crap out of the animal that adapted to get the coconut open and steal it's coconuts
Avatar image for perfect_chao
perfect_chao

2066

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 perfect_chao
Member since 2005 • 2066 Posts

They teach you stuff in school which could be a bunch of BS anyway.. thats why there is more than 1 theory, so there is no answer.. nobody knows, you cant say there is an answer to either one because there isnt any proof.

I believe aliens were involved somewhere, u can flame me all u like for that comment.. anyone else who thinks we are alone in this little tiny dot we call earth in the whole universe.. well, all i have to say to you is that you need to open your mind.

:)

Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#41 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts
K theres 2 theories
1)The Charles Darwin Theory  says that we have adapted to fit out enviroment. Ex. if there are 3 different types of animals on a island, and all that island has to eat is cocunuts, the animal that can get in the tree and crack open the cocunut and eat it will survive well the rest starve to death and become extinct and the other one reproduces.
2) Bible Theory says..........God did it all
You decide what you wanna belive
2nd Question
I have no damn clue:)
Burning_Shadow
if that common ancestor divided into different groups than we should be evolving at the same pace right? That would mean that those other branches would have evolved into humanlike creatures and not have stayed as monkeys. Like cromagnun and neanderthal. they died off. that should've been it right? They couldn't have devolved back to monkeys right?
Avatar image for PenguinPaladin
PenguinPaladin

3529

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 PenguinPaladin
Member since 2005 • 3529 Posts
RELIGION AND EVOLUTION HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON!!! It is pefectably plausable for both to exsist. Why can' t people get this in their head.
Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#43 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts
my bad. quoted the wrong one.
Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#44 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts
RELIGION AND EVOLUTION HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON!!! It is pefectably plausable for both to exsist. Why can' t people get this in their head.PenguinPaladin
exactly.
Avatar image for perfect_chao
perfect_chao

2066

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 perfect_chao
Member since 2005 • 2066 Posts

Hmm, thats another thing..

religion is a cause to all problems, think about it. is it really that hard to accept? for you.. yes.

oh well, too bad.

Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#46 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="vickersfan"] if that common ancestor divided into different groups than we should be evolving at the same pace right? That would mean that those other branches would have evolved into humanlike creatures and not have stayed as monkeys. Like cromagnun and neanderthal. they died off. that should've been it right? They couldn't have devolved back to monkeys right?

Wrong, that's not how evolution works. It isn't a single diagonal line going to a certain design, it's all random what happens to be the most effective for the environment. Crocodiles have stayed nearly the same for over 65 million year.s
Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#47 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts

Hmm, thats another thing..

religion is a cause to all problems, think about it. is it really that hard to accept? for you.. yes.

oh well, too bad.

perfect_chao
different religions and beliefs are find but it's when people try to force their personal beliefs onto others is when the problems start. still nuttin to do with evolution though.
Avatar image for vickersfan
vickersfan

895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#48 vickersfan
Member since 2005 • 895 Posts
[QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="vickersfan"] if that common ancestor divided into different groups than we should be evolving at the same pace right? That would mean that those other branches would have evolved into humanlike creatures and not have stayed as monkeys. Like cromagnun and neanderthal. they died off. that should've been it right? They couldn't have devolved back to monkeys right?

Wrong, that's not how evolution works. It isn't a single diagonal line going to a certain design, it's all random what happens to be the most effective for the environment. Crocodiles have stayed nearly the same for over 65 million year.s

hmmm...were you alive 65million years ago? a conclusion cannot be drawn from 65million year old bones.no one really knows for sure if it's true or not, but hey, you believe what you believe and i believe what i believe right? no worries. besides i said branches not single line.
Avatar image for -Karayan-
-Karayan-

6713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#49 -Karayan-
Member since 2006 • 6713 Posts
[QUOTE="vickersfan"][QUOTE="-Karayan-"][QUOTE="vickersfan"] if that common ancestor divided into different groups than we should be evolving at the same pace right? That would mean that those other branches would have evolved into humanlike creatures and not have stayed as monkeys. Like cromagnun and neanderthal. they died off. that should've been it right? They couldn't have devolved back to monkeys right?

Wrong, that's not how evolution works. It isn't a single diagonal line going to a certain design, it's all random what happens to be the most effective for the environment. Crocodiles have stayed nearly the same for over 65 million year.s

hmmm...were you alive 65million years ago? a conclusion cannot be drawn from 65million year old bones.no one really knows for sure if it's true or not, but hey, you believe what you believe and i believe what i believe right? no worries. besides i said branches not single line...didn't i? well i definately didn't say single diagonal line.

Actually they can, they have found 65 million year old skeletons that are almost identical to those of the common crocodile.... Still, what you said was a flawed idea of evolution.
Avatar image for El_Fanboy
El_Fanboy

5789

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 El_Fanboy
Member since 2002 • 5789 Posts
easy. the answer to both questions is survival of the fittest