5th April 2009, 8:25 AM
Not like wishing! I've always ben in love with this. When I was 16 I wrote this 200 page thing for school that was supposed to be a paper on Darwin and his theory of evolution. Instead I talked about how Darwin was no doubt a genius but his education could only go so far as the technology couldn't prove or disprove his theories. A lot of times his theories were educated guesses (which is the basis of science exploration) but he's been proven wrong several times.
Not because he's necessarily wrong but again, because we couldn't measure, study or examine to the level we can now. But what threw me was that animals took on the shapes of specific leaves, sticks and flowers. Seahorses that look exactly like a type of seaweed for example. They always hide in the seaweed, but some seahorse types hide in coral or rock, or other plant types - they fall in to a generic 'seahorse' because they haven't exposed themselves to specific thing for any extended period. They move too much, using rocks one day to hide, then coral the next. So if a seahorse WAS born that looked like the rocks around it, as soon as it tried to hide in coral it would be snatched up by a predator.
But these specific seahorses stayed in this seaweed exclusively, never leaving it. Even before they took on the shape of the seaweed, it gave them protection and offered them food sources from other animals that hid in the seaweed, which is only found in certain parts of the world. Is it really ridiculous to think that an animal exposing itself constantly to the seaweed could eventually take on the characteristics of the seaweed over tens of thousands of years? And the seahorses that looked more like seaweed had a higher survivability rate, furthering the genetic mutations even more? ie cementing that mutation as a permanent route for the animal.
Snow is white so animals slowly evolve to white who live in snow and their skin, hair etc all become suited for cold life. The desert is gold and brown so they become gold and brown, gaining skin and hair that help them in hot conditions. It's not entirely random and there has to be the catalyst of the environment to spark the change - otherwise the animal stays as it was and never has to change and evolve.
Life just tries to find a comfort zone where it has its highest chance of survivability... then it slows down to a crawl. Suddenly those mutations simply dont happen. Talk about an Intelligent Design.
Is it why human beings have such an imagination? Could it be that during the ice age people who didnt have an imagination fell victim to mental problems of being so isolated and that humans with skill in art, music, imagination etc had a higher survivability? Is that the real separation of animal to man? why isn't this being researched! I need 10 million dollars and a beard, i'll get the answers god dammit.
Not because he's necessarily wrong but again, because we couldn't measure, study or examine to the level we can now. But what threw me was that animals took on the shapes of specific leaves, sticks and flowers. Seahorses that look exactly like a type of seaweed for example. They always hide in the seaweed, but some seahorse types hide in coral or rock, or other plant types - they fall in to a generic 'seahorse' because they haven't exposed themselves to specific thing for any extended period. They move too much, using rocks one day to hide, then coral the next. So if a seahorse WAS born that looked like the rocks around it, as soon as it tried to hide in coral it would be snatched up by a predator.
But these specific seahorses stayed in this seaweed exclusively, never leaving it. Even before they took on the shape of the seaweed, it gave them protection and offered them food sources from other animals that hid in the seaweed, which is only found in certain parts of the world. Is it really ridiculous to think that an animal exposing itself constantly to the seaweed could eventually take on the characteristics of the seaweed over tens of thousands of years? And the seahorses that looked more like seaweed had a higher survivability rate, furthering the genetic mutations even more? ie cementing that mutation as a permanent route for the animal.
Snow is white so animals slowly evolve to white who live in snow and their skin, hair etc all become suited for cold life. The desert is gold and brown so they become gold and brown, gaining skin and hair that help them in hot conditions. It's not entirely random and there has to be the catalyst of the environment to spark the change - otherwise the animal stays as it was and never has to change and evolve.
Life just tries to find a comfort zone where it has its highest chance of survivability... then it slows down to a crawl. Suddenly those mutations simply dont happen. Talk about an Intelligent Design.
Is it why human beings have such an imagination? Could it be that during the ice age people who didnt have an imagination fell victim to mental problems of being so isolated and that humans with skill in art, music, imagination etc had a higher survivability? Is that the real separation of animal to man? why isn't this being researched! I need 10 million dollars and a beard, i'll get the answers god dammit.