Does evolution have a purpose?

[TagliatelliMonster]

I suppose it would be beneath you to give examples and scientific research into these predictable ranges of outcomes? I am not saying there's not a "natural law..." There obviously is. But then a predictable range of outcome? I mean would that be like a snake born with two heads, you know, like a "predictable outcome?" If so, any wisdom on your part as to how this would be "predictable"? If not, help out with your wisdom and knowledge. Thanks.

A human being born with feathers, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.
A bird growing plastic legs, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.
A dog giving birth to a cat, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

here's what I think, not that it's worth anything to you. I think that outside influences, such as a rock falling on a snake's head, or chemical disturbance in a parent's body, can certainly influence the outcome. Predictable? Hardly. But certainly possible. I can't "prove" it. And of course, neither can you.

No, those things are within predictable ranges of outcomes.

To take your rock example and turn it into something that is outside of that range would be like the falling rock shooting into space instead of tumbling down on the snake's head.

There is nothing in natural laws that prevents a rock falling to earth. There is nothing in natural law that prevents that rock from falling on anything beneath it either, be it a snake head or whatever other object that finds itself in that trajectory.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

So far Evolution has come up with some pretty weird creatures including Man.
From our point of view that is pretty useful.
But not for all the creatures that we have killed off.

Fortunately Evolution is only a Journey along the way
And so far it is only a short way along that path.
We may evolve into a species that is really useful one day.
or we may be just a red herring.
We may only be the necessary food stock, for something that is now totally insignificant,
which will one day evolve to save the Universe.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

A human being born with feathers, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.
A bird growing plastic legs, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.
A dog giving birth to a cat, is outside of the predictable range of outcomes.

Feathers are modified Scales as are Hairs. we probably still have the necessary genes to grow feathers. or scales instead of hair.
Triggering that is a different question.

 

[YoursTrue]

Because anatomically modern humans were around way before 20,000 years ago. They were around before 100,000 years ago. We have dated fossils and DNA.
Whether there was a need or not is irrelevant. There was a "need" (use) for insulin, plastic, guns, and wheels on luggage a thousand years ago, too, and we were just as intelligent, yet we never developed these things. The Zeitgeist just wasn't right.
Why? Why can't we figure out how our brains, or any other anatomical or physiological feature, developed? Biology has been figuring these things out for nearly 200 years, and farmers had basic selection down for thousands of years.

So let's see. Anatomically you say humans as we know them now were around way before 20,000 years ago. Please direct me to a website that shows evidence of this assertion. Thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

Early humans lived in tropical Africa, where protective clothing wasn't common until recently.
Until recent contact with Europeans, tropical peoples often went naked or nearly so.

I'm saying other apes have different skills, exceeding humans in some, and lagging in others. Environment/natural selection select for which capabilities develop.
I don't follow.
What would the point of recording the natural history of lungfish, mudskippers or snakeheads? Everyone knew the local fauna, and anything that needed to be communicated about it could be done by word of mouth.

How would paleolithic man notice evolution? It's not like it happened in a single lifetime, and their knowledge of fossils, DNA or even selective breeding was nil.

I realize that's the argument, that evolution takes time to notice. And why would humans feel the need to record history, but lungfish don't? (It doesn't matter ... because I know what I know and you know what you know, and the two can hardly meet. )

 

[Valjean]

So far Evolution has come up with some pretty weird creatures including Man.
From our point of view that is pretty useful.
But not for all the creatures that we have killed off.

Fortunately Evolution is only a Journey along the way
And so far it is only a short way along that path.
We may evolve into a species that is really useful one day.
or we may be just a red herring.
We may only be the necessary food stock, for something that is now totally insignificant,
which will one day evolve to save the Universe.

So far, we seem to have evolved into the planet's first pandemic pathogen -- and we're shaping up to prove a lethal one.

 

[Valjean]

So let's see. Anatomically you say humans as we know them now were around way before 20,000 years ago. Please direct me to a website that shows evidence of this assertion. Thanks.

Google is your friend.

You really think science is just speculation, don't you? You have no idea what science is, how it works, or how scientists know what they know.

Science is not like the religion you're familiar with. What you need to do is go back to the very basics, to elementary school, as it were.
You're way out of your depth, here.

YoursTrue said: ↑
I realize that's the argument, that evolution takes time to notice. And why would humans feel the need to record history, but lungfish don't? (It doesn't matter ... because I know what I know and you know what you know, and the two can hardly meet. )

Then one of us doesn't "know." There's only one reality, here.

 

[YoursTrue]

Google is your friend.

You really think science is just speculation, don't you?

No. So you may take away the rest of your thought about what I think. Meantime, you make assertions but have no real answer other than a rather snide remark.

You have no idea what science is, how it works, or how scientists know what they know.

Science is not like the religion you're familiar with. What you need to do is go back to the very basics, to elementary school, as it were.
You're way out of your depth, here.

Then one of us doesn't "know." There's only one reality, here.

There is no reality when there are no real proofs. Weighing things on the scale, I find much more reason to believe in creation, no matter how you understand it or don't, than evolution by "natural selection," apparently thought of with many branches.
You make assertions without backing them up. And this response on your part because I asked you how you really KNOW that humans were around 20,000 years ago. But you claim that's what it is. That's what I have come to expect, sad to say.

 

[YoursTrue]

So far, we seem to have evolved into the planet's first pandemic pathogen -- and we're shaping up to prove a lethal one.

That's evolution for ya. Here's a little joke for you: Maybe ALL life will be obliterated. Or how about maybe it will start all over again from a few specks somewhere.
I have a different view of the outcome and the future than you do.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Valjean

So let's see. Anatomically you say humans as we know them now were around way before 20,000 years ago. Please direct me to a website that shows evidence of this assertion. Thanks.

I was being polite here. Instead of asking you to explain your assertion that "anatomic" humans were around way before 20,000 years ago...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Feathers are modified Scales as are Hairs. we probably still have the necessary genes to grow feathers.

No.

Scales are the ancestral trait.
One lineage went on to become feathers, the other hair.
There are no "backsies" in evolution.

Over very loooooooooooong periods, it could be that hair evolves into something that might look like feathers, perhaps, but the underlying genetics would not be the same. They would not be feathers as we know them in birds.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So let's see. Anatomically you say humans as we know them now were around way before 20,000 years ago. Please direct me to a website that shows evidence of this assertion. Thanks.

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia

 

[oldbadger]

Does evolution have a purpose?
-If yes what is it?
-If no, why not?

No.
Evolution has no purpose.
Evolution is the product of natural chaos = no set purpose.
It is what it is.
It will go where it might......
T

 

[YoursTrue]

No there are not big gaps. Your lack of knowledge of the science concerning evolution is appalling. Your questions have become more and more meaningless and not worth responding to.

Get educated and ask meaningful questions.

Your way of responding is more than appalling. Others are reading them. You claim to be educated. and if that's what "education" does for you, that's a shame.
Billions of years, hmm, and you have "proof" that evolution occurred throughout that time -- but continue to insult me without giving any proof. So arrogant. I'd hate to see you as a lawyer. bye for now...

 

[YoursTrue]

But there are air breathing fish, and fish that can leave the water and walk, even today.

Going back to the original question, did those types think about it? Does evolution think so as to have a purpose? What do you think? Is it just thoughts, or does thinking have a purpose?

 

[metis]

"Evolution" is a process, therefore it cannot by itself "think" nor therefore have a "purpose". The real question is what set this process in motion and whether it was Divine or happenstance? However, that is impossible to answer objectively.

 

[Valjean]

Going back to the original question, did those types think about it? Does evolution think so as to have a purpose? What do you think? Is it just thoughts, or does thinking have a purpose?

What does thinking have to do with purpose?

 

[shunyadragon]

Your way of responding is more than appalling. Others are reading them. You claim to be educated. and if that's what "education" does for you, that's a shame.
Billions of years, hmm, and you have "proof" that evolution occurred throughout that time -- but continue to insult me without giving any proof. So arrogant. I'd hate to see you as a lawyer. bye for now...

Yes, I have a Masters in geology and over 50 years professional experience in Geology.


The insult is you have absolutely no education and experience in the fields related to evolution, and you have failed to present 'one' peer reviewed scientific article to support your assertions with a religious agenda.

As usual you event misrepresent the basics of how science works. Proof is for logic and math, and not science. Science falsifies theories and hypothesis based on objective verifiable evidence. There is abundant evidence from physical stratigraphy correlated with radiometric dating, and geomorphological evidence of erosions and deposition. On the other hand there is absolutely no evidence for the Biblical account nor a Biblical flood.

 

[shunyadragon]

Going back to the original question, did those types think about it? Does evolution think so as to have a purpose? What do you think? Is it just thoughts, or does thinking have a purpose?

The question has been answered repeatedly and you choose to ignore the responses

The objective verifiable 'cause' of evolution is Natural Law and natural processes. Any purpose beyond this would be a theological/philosophical 'belief' in a purpose claim from the perspective of many diverse conflicting subjective religious world views, and not science.

Since you do not believe in evolution what is the purpose of questioning whether 'evolution' has a purpose.