| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Doubts about evolution.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Doubts about evolution.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 01:12
The opposite side of catastrophe and extinction appears to be bounty and proliferation.  The scenario is in a cycle where both are included simultaneously from the different points of view.  If you are the marsupial you experienced loss in your numbers while as a Euterian you experienced growth.  The evolution/diversification part happens greater relative to those going into extinction but which are evolving nonetheless.

The bible, whether the religion is something you believe in or not, contains fascinating accounts of catastrophe in revelations.  Of note, the 4 horseman.  For humans, extinction will come in the form of pestilence and plague, famine, war and death.  Now obviously death is death but the other 3 are really manifestations of the environment.  Humans and many of their food products would thus dwindle and species of pestilence would proliferate and diversify.  Humans that kill each other end up adding to the catastrophe.  At least that's what happens going by the logic I've understood thus far.
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 07:01
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

The opposite side of catastrophe and extinction appears to be bounty and proliferation.  The scenario is in a cycle where both are included simultaneously from the different points of view.
It is not likely to be "cyclic", since there are many events that can trigger a catastrophe.
"Cycles" imply as I see it some sort of regularity, and we can not at all be sure catastrophes come regularly and not at random.
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:


  If you are the marsupial you experienced loss in your numbers while as a Euterian you experienced growth.  The evolution/diversification part happens greater relative to those going into extinction but which are evolving nonetheless.

The bible, whether the religion is something you believe in or not, contains fascinating accounts of catastrophe in revelations.  Of note, the 4 horseman.  For humans, extinction will come in the form of pestilence and plague, famine, war and death.  Now obviously death is death but the other 3 are really manifestations of the environment.  Humans and many of their food products would thus dwindle and species of pestilence would proliferate and diversify.  Humans that kill each other end up adding to the catastrophe.  At least that's what happens going by the logic I've understood thus far.
While of course humans will not become extinct except by death, catastrophes does not necessarily come as famine, war or pestilence.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4923
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 07:28
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:


Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

The opposite side of catastrophe and extinction appears to be bounty and proliferation.  The scenario is in a cycle where both are included simultaneously from the different points of view.<span style="line-height: 16.7999992370605px;">
</span>
It is not likely to be "cyclic", since there are many events that can trigger a catastrophe.
"Cycles" imply as I see it some sort of regularity, and we can not at all be sure catastrophes come regularly and not at random.<span style="line-height: 16.7999992370605px;">
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

</span>

  If you are the marsupial you experienced loss in your numbers while as a Euterian you experienced growth.  The evolution/diversification part happens greater relative to those going into extinction but which are evolving nonetheless.

The bible, whether the religion is something you believe in or not, contains fascinating accounts of catastrophe in revelations.  Of note, the 4 horseman.  For humans, extinction will come in the form of pestilence and plague, famine, war and death.  Now obviously death is death but the other 3 are really manifestations of the environment.  Humans and many of their food products would thus dwindle and species of pestilence would proliferate and diversify.  Humans that kill each other end up adding to the catastrophe.  At least that's what happens going by the logic I've understood thus far.
While of course humans will not become extinct except by death, catastrophes does not necessarily come as famine, war or pestilence.


Are you saying that other species have become extinct by other than death?

There are many events within the human imagination which could properly described as catastrophic, but which don't necessarily result in mass human death.

You've made your point about doubting evolution, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but posting waffle to try to regain ground in the debate simply won't work.

Every realistic person in the world, imho, supports the evolution theory, while only a few radicals actually support the creationist theory.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 12:02
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:


It is not likely to be "cyclic", since there are many events that can trigger a catastrophe.
"Cycles" imply as I see it some sort of regularity, and we can not at all be sure catastrophes come regularly and not at random.
While of course humans will not become extinct except by death, catastrophes does not necessarily come as famine, war or pestilence.


Are you saying that other species have become extinct by other than death?
 
No, I am saying exactly the opposite, since that as I see it follows from logic.
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

 
There are many events within the human imagination which could properly described as catastrophic, but which don't necessarily result in mass human death. 


You've made your point about doubting evolution, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but posting waffle to try to regain ground in the debate simply won't work.

Every realistic person in the world, imho, supports the evolution theory, while only a few radicals actually support the creationist theory.
 I give up repeating that this thread is not about "creationism" as I stated from the beginning.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 12:16
First part of my first post:
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

First, to avoid misunderstandings: This thread is not intenderd to be about "late creationism" 

Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4923
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 14:03
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

First part of my first post:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

First, to avoid misunderstandings: This thread is not intenderd to be about "late creationism" 




Or catastrophism.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 18:05
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

First part of my first post:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

First, to avoid misunderstandings: This thread is not intenderd to be about "late creationism" 




Or catastrophism.
Well, i wanted from the start to discuss catastrophes and their role in the  history of earth and life upon it, though of course You better know what You want to discuss.
Back to Top
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 21:10
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

The opposite side of catastrophe and extinction appears to be bounty and proliferation.  The scenario is in a cycle where both are included simultaneously from the different points of view.
It is not likely to be "cyclic", since there are many events that can trigger a catastrophe.
"Cycles" imply as I see it some sort of regularity, and we can not at all be sure catastrophes come regularly and not at random.
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:


  If you are the marsupial you experienced loss in your numbers while as a Euterian you experienced growth.  The evolution/diversification part happens greater relative to those going into extinction but which are evolving nonetheless.

The bible, whether the religion is something you believe in or not, contains fascinating accounts of catastrophe in revelations.  Of note, the 4 horseman.  For humans, extinction will come in the form of pestilence and plague, famine, war and death.  Now obviously death is death but the other 3 are really manifestations of the environment.  Humans and many of their food products would thus dwindle and species of pestilence would proliferate and diversify.  Humans that kill each other end up adding to the catastrophe.  At least that's what happens going by the logic I've understood thus far.
While of course humans will not become extinct except by death, catastrophes does not necessarily come as famine, war or pestilence.

Perhaps cyclic is the wrong word.  More like "revolutionary".  The pendulum will swing the other way as it finishes its stroke going in the opposite direction.  So bounty before catastrophe, proliferation before extinction.  Catastrophe before bounty, extinction before proliferation.  The human race has developed this way out of Africa.  Many human forms dissappeared across the landscape when times got tough but at least there were different forms to speak of.  Now humans are 99.9 genetically similar.  We call this the result of bottlenecking and where all humans today are perhaps descended from as little as a few thousand individuals.  In miilions of years time when humans have spanned the galaxy different "human" forms will have emerged as a result of their proliferation.  Some "human" forms might wage intergalactic war against other "human" forms causing death and destruction.  Again, the point here is the catastrophe after the proliferation.
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 22:09
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

The opposite side of catastrophe and extinction appears to be bounty and proliferation.  The scenario is in a cycle where both are included simultaneously from the different points of view.
It is not likely to be "cyclic", since there are many events that can trigger a catastrophe.
"Cycles" imply as I see it some sort of regularity, and we can not at all be sure catastrophes come regularly and not at random.
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:


  If you are the marsupial you experienced loss in your numbers while as a Euterian you experienced growth.  The evolution/diversification part happens greater relative to those going into extinction but which are evolving nonetheless.

The bible, whether the religion is something you believe in or not, contains fascinating accounts of catastrophe in revelations.  Of note, the 4 horseman.  For humans, extinction will come in the form of pestilence and plague, famine, war and death.  Now obviously death is death but the other 3 are really manifestations of the environment.  Humans and many of their food products would thus dwindle and species of pestilence would proliferate and diversify.  Humans that kill each other end up adding to the catastrophe.  At least that's what happens going by the logic I've understood thus far.
While of course humans will not become extinct except by death, catastrophes does not necessarily come as famine, war or pestilence.

Perhaps cyclic is the wrong word.  More like "revolutionary".  The pendulum will swing the other way as it finishes its stroke going in the opposite direction.  So bounty before catastrophe, proliferation before extinction.  Catastrophe before bounty, extinction before proliferation.  The human race has developed this way out of Africa.  Many human forms dissappeared across the landscape when times got tough but at least there were different forms to speak of.  Now humans are 99.9 genetically similar.  We call this the result of bottlenecking and where all humans today are perhaps descended from as little as a few thousand individuals.  In miilions of years time when humans have spanned the galaxy different "human" forms will have emerged as a result of their proliferation.  Some "human" forms might wage intergalactic war against other "human" forms causing death and destruction.  Again, the point here is the catastrophe after the proliferation.
If the catastrophe comes from an asteroid impact or from some other "cosmic" cause, or from some geological proces there is no obvious reason it has any relation to previous "bounty" or any "pendulum swing". And I have doubts about the whole idea we or any other "intelligent" species will ever spread from the planet of origin.
Back to Top
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2014 at 22:37
Right I'm not researching the future but just speculating about intergalactic wars.  But to the degree events on Earth are based on catastrophes and bounties have to do with the same spectrum of evolution which happens as a result for all life on Earth.  Different hominids have not been wiped out due to comet disasters, only dinosaurs.  Dinosaurs were the ones which got killed off but the mammalian types which continued in abundance discovered their time of bounty only after dinosaurs got killed off.  The comet was a catastrophe for dinosaurs.  In turn the death of dinosaurs was a boon to the mammalians.
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 00:43
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 
Are you saying that other species have become extinct by other than death?

LOL

Actually, extinction comes when fertility is surpased by the rate of mortality. 
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 02:36
Well human evolution is very slow remember?  So the extinction rate at which modern humans die off completely won't come for another millions of years when a new species will perhaps develop.  The Neanderthal and Denisovan in us is on the endangered list though.  LOL
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 06:22
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 
Are you saying that other species have become extinct by other than death?

LOL

Actually, extinction comes when fertility is surpased by the rate of mortality. 
I prefer to say at 100% mortality. Mortality can surpas fertility for a long time without it ending in extinction.
Back to Top
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 07:47
Wasn't there the idea that African savannah used to be covered by forest and that's why apes had developed.  But when the savannah grew to reduce the forest suddenly apes found they had to go from tree to tree just to find food.  Thus Lucy, the hominid was born.  If it is possible apes might yet again tinker with this sort of behavior they could forseeably evolve upright bipedalism all over again.
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 11:20
Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

Wasn't there the idea that African savannah used to be covered by forest and that's why apes had developed.  But when the savannah grew to reduce the forest suddenly apes found they had to go from tree to tree just to find food.  Thus Lucy, the hominid was born.  If it is possible apes might yet again tinker with this sort of behavior they could forseeably evolve upright bipedalism all over again.
There has been many ideas around, including one of an aquatic origin. That is not the sdame as to say they have to be true.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 11:36
And that You can say about my posts too:there is some ideas, but that is what I have. It is of course open to debate wether I am wrong suggesting that were organisms lived was often all important to their long term survival - or extinction. And it almost has to be so, that others has stumbled upon the same idea. Admitting that I don´t find it that unlikely at all. Whatever great disasters that hit the planet in the past, it is hard to believe many of them had the same effect in all places (OK:The dominant theory of how the moon came into existence is that the proto-earth collided with another protoplanet the size of Mars. I doubt anything survived such an event). Otherwise organisms in highlands would survive even global tsunamis and if sunlight was blocked with dust from asteroids or volcanoes there may have been some places were some sunlight got through - perhaps high mountain regions, were photosyntesis could continue.
Back to Top
literaryClarity View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 02 May 2014
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 698
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote literaryClarity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 2014 at 17:28
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Originally posted by literaryClarity literaryClarity wrote:

Wasn't there the idea that African savannah used to be covered by forest and that's why apes had developed.  But when the savannah grew to reduce the forest suddenly apes found they had to go from tree to tree just to find food.  Thus Lucy, the hominid was born.  If it is possible apes might yet again tinker with this sort of behavior they could forseeably evolve upright bipedalism all over again.
There has been many ideas around, including one of an aquatic origin. That is not the sdame as to say they have to be true.


Aquatic origin of bipedalism?  I'll have to google that some time.
http://hwyst.hangzhou.com.cn/wmyzh/content/2013-10/09/content_4920423.htm
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.