SERIOUS Wonderment Concerning Evolution...

Post Reply New Topic

As always, these things evolve slowly over time.

There will always be natural variation in flower depths and proboscis lengths. The animal with the shorter proboscis cannot reach the nectar in the deeper flowers. Those with longer proboscises find that they don't have to share the nectar in the deeper flowers with as many others, so they specialise on these ones. This creates two niches were before there was only one. We soon have a "long proboscis" population of insects and a "deep flower" population of plants. Again, there's natural variation within both those populations, and the process repeats itself.

....and sometimes these things evolve quickly over time if the selection pressure is intense enough. And us humans have exerted some pretty intense selection pressure. Usually the go-to example is bacterial antibiotic resistance. The ID'ers have evolved their own defense to that example by coining the term microevolution. But today I'm feeling a little silly so I'm going with Cracked's unique take on animals rapidly responding to human-made selection pressure.

Cracked on evolution

They have the obligatory "pepper moth gets pollution-esque coloring" that we all learned in high school biology. But I thought the one about the dogs on the Russian subways was more fun.

That a dog is a creature with the ability to learn to perform in a circus means that it can also learn how to find food in streets and subways. Thousands of generations of shepherds know that dogs and sheep are easy to train because they come equipped with very good memories for places and things.

Your ideology would imply that they should evolve wheels to run on train tracks so they wouldn't have to wait for trains, though.

Per the beginning of this thread.....no.

I'm not so keen on the example of dogs taking the train. That's something a dog can pick up in its lifetime. If the frequency of the ability to learn it is changing, then that's evolution, but just seeing dogs do it doesn't move me.

They would evolve wheels to be faster to evade predators assuming there are smooth surfaces. They would need all terrain wheels for the rocky ones and ridges in the wheels, for muddy surfaces, like you see in tires.

They would evolve them for the same reasons we invented them.

Evolution is not directional. It cannot aim for a goal. Even whole wheels would not work, for the reasons already explained to you in this thread. Half wheels would be all but useless.

Please Ana, it's great that you're interested in evolution but it would be better if you applied yourself to understanding it. You frequently ignore the most basic concepts in evolutionary biology (such as evolution not being able to aim for a goal), and then arrogantly act as if you know more than everyone else.

I don't act as I know more than everyone else. In fact, I frequently ask for people to contribute. Instead, they want to challenge everything I type as if I couldn't possibly understand even the most basic of concepts. Open your minds, I say. Can you say you know for a FACT and can provide absolute proof there is not a planet or moon somewhere that has creatures that evolved wheels much like birds evolved wings with feathers? Instead of spending so much energy negating my thoughts, why not consider the possibilities and admit you do not know for sure because you, like me and everyone else, have not seen all there is to see. We all have exceptionally limited perception of the universe.

Ana you constantly and consistently present your thought bubbles as being as valid as hypothesis and theories which have many thousands of hours of research and experiment backing them up. Many times now I have implored you to read up on the subject you are discussing, but I get the impression you never get past the headlines. So maybe you do not think you know more than everyone else but you most certainly seem to think your completely unsubstantiated thoughts have equal voracity. To answer your question no of course we cannot absolutely prove their is not a planet with wheeled life forms. However the basic fundamentals of physics and the nature of evolution strongly suggest that given the laws of the visible universe existence of such a planet is next to impossible. Suggesting wheels should have evolved on this planet exposes your almost complete lack of knowledge regarding evolutionary biology.

Just the idea that it is possible (somewhere) is enough to make it interesting and I honestly do not understand the reactions I am getting. Everything I have typed makes perfect sense to me. It seems completely logical. I don't see why anyone would get offended at such an idea. When you consider feathers for instance...it's not that much of a stretch.

Just the idea that mankind was able to come up with such inventions is awe inspiring and seems like a part of evolution. There is much more to this than meets the eye. It's not just a matter of it being impossible, physically and genetically, as many believe. It's a matter of a evolutionary branch of the planet being able to realize what we haven't seen from biological evolution.

And we still don't know if it's completely and utterly impossible in the universe.

I feel it is entirely unnecessary to say it is impossible.

I can see some little creature somewhere having these little feather-looking fingers (resembling a gecko's maybe?) moving quickly, in a circular motion, and that is how it gets around. Imagine four feet with these fingers that can move in a circular motion and you have something like a wheel. Imagine something like a centipede that has feet with really tiny appendages that move in a circular motion. They could be so small you couldn't see them however they propel it along. It's kind of like a propeller only it would involve highly sophisticated coordination on the part of the creature who has them. Such creatures could exist on other planets or moons.

Don't worry, ooOoOsy, these bods are trying to make their ridiculous fancies seem more credible by rubbishing yours.

Its no so much offense, rather a facepalm. The trouble is Ana you prefer your thought bubble versions of events over knowledge that has been garnered through very diligent experiment and observation. All we are trying to say is that most of your questions would be answered if you took the time to get a basic grasp of the subject. As for Evolution in the biological sense has nothing to do with tools, except the evolution of an organism that can make tools. Unless you are going to suggest that a life form could invent a tool that runs on wheels and, overtime, the inventor works it in such a way that it becomes self replicating, perhaps even sentient and maybe with the ability to adapt to changing environs. If this is what you are getting at then you are talking creation myth, and there is nothing to this other than pure speculation. Could this be possible? maybe, is it plausible? who knows, did you start this thread speculating about far away planets and the possible life forms on them? No you did not.

Let me remind you what you said;



The above comment has nothing to do with unknown evolutionary events on far away planets, you are specifically referring to known earth based evolution, so please stop trying to shift the goal posts, and for once do some research on the subject and then you will have the answer to your question.

Arty, you are the guy ducking and weaving all over the field with the goal posts in your pocket.

"Unknown evolutionary events" exist only in your fancy and have no connection with the reality that constrains sane people.

You already proposed that at the start of the thread.

Several folks already addressed that issue.

You cant have a free spinning wheel on a living organism larger that unicellular paramecium. And even if you could there would be no advantage to it. Feral dogs with wheels for limbs could ride the subway rails between stations but they wouldnt be able to climb off the rails and jump on the platforms to hunt for food. And even wheels with off road treads on an animal are not be very useful for running down prey unless the prey sticks to roads, and doesnt run through tall grass, or over mud, up trees.

But something like what you were talking about in the other post might be possible.

Maybe you could have a large multicellular creature with tiny cilia on its skin cells. These microscopic appendages could pulse in cordinated waves pushing against the surface that you're standing on in a way that mimics the bottom of a spinning wheel ( it would be like the rubber meeting the road). Lets say you, a human, had this system of pulsing cilia on the bottom of your feet. You could just stand there without taking a step and the skin on your feet would just propel you along! But even so you couldnt possible move very fast with that system. So its hard to imagine how that would be very useful.

I have recently discovered that it is pointless trying to reason with ANA regarding what we have discovered about the Natural world. She is a Christian Gnostic and therefore believes in the Gnostic understanding of the Demiurge, meaning that the only way to understanding is through spiritual means via asceticism and the refutation of the materiel world. The upshot of this is that anything discovered via "material" means is immediately open to suspicion and scepticism as it was created by The Demiurge who is known as the creator of falsehoods and evil. The effect of the Demiurge upon the materiel world (within Gnosticism) is hard to pin down. Some see the Demiurge as a lower god doing the best it could using the fallible and inferior product of that is Materiel, others go so far as to describe it as Satan. Whatever the case ANA will never accept something Material that differs from her self found spiritual belief as this has come from a higher realm

Woo! That's rich coming from you who subscribe to a faith that is completely divorced from the real world and its natural laws.