Irony of the evolutionary belief

[John53]

Just beat me to it lol

I'm the early bird...

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Speaking of reproduction, "breeding like rabbits" surely helps their population survive. I think they have 5 or 6 litters a year.

Reproductive strategies can be lumped into two approaches. r-selected species reproduce in large numbers with a lower parental investment on average. Rabbits, dandelions, mice, sea turtles and similar. Lots and lots of offspring and you are more likely to produce replacements for the preceding generation. In some cases, many more.

k-selected species have lower numbers of offspring with a greater parental investment. Humans, deer (though you might not believe it for Missouri, they're like weeds now), horses, elephants, etc.

Overall the strategies are quality or quantity.

There are also versions in between.

Rabbits definitely go all pirate. Arrrr.

But they do have some parental investment.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Referencing deer reminded me of this. The most unusual deer versus truck accident I've ever heard.

A woman I know was telling me about her son hitting a buck on the highway while driving this very nice, very new, full-size GMC, crew cab pickup. The deer was hit, entered the passenger compartment through the right side of the windshield, continued through leaving bits and damage behind on out the back window and landing on the toolbox in the bed. The son was the only passenger and was grazed by the passing deer, but largely unharmed. She showed me photos taken at the scene. I've never heard of an accident quite like it. I forget what the insurance assessment was, but many thousands of dollars and it is getting fixed.

 

[McBell]

Referencing deer reminded me of this. The most unusual deer versus truck accident I've ever heard.

A woman I know was telling me about her son hitting a buck on the highway while driving this very nice, very new, full-size GMC, crew cab pickup. The deer was hit, entered the passenger compartment through the right side of the windshield, continued through leaving bits and damage behind on out the back window and landing on the toolbox in the bed. The son was the only passenger and was grazed by the passing deer, but largely unharmed. She showed me photos taken at the scene. I've never heard of an accident quite like it. I forget what the insurance assessment was, but many thousands of dollars and it is getting fixed.

I had a 78 ford F150 and the deer I hit jumped just as I hit it.
Took out the radiator, hood, windshield, and steering wheel.

I was bruised up pretty good, but nothing serious.
The insurance wrote it off as totaled.

So I ended up getting a Chevy 3500 four door dually.

Haven't hit a deer since

 

[John53]

Referencing deer reminded me of this. The most unusual deer versus truck accident I've ever heard.

A woman I know was telling me about her son hitting a buck on the highway while driving this very nice, very new, full-size GMC, crew cab pickup. The deer was hit, entered the passenger compartment through the right side of the windshield, continued through leaving bits and damage behind on out the back window and landing on the toolbox in the bed. The son was the only passenger and was grazed by the passing deer, but largely unharmed. She showed me photos taken at the scene. I've never heard of an accident quite like it. I forget what the insurance assessment was, but many thousands of dollars and it is getting fixed.

My brother had a similar situation with a large eastern grey kangaroo doing the watusi on his lap.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I had a 78 ford F150 and the deer I hit jumped just as I hit it.
Took out the radiator, hood, windshield, and steering wheel.

I was bruised up pretty good, but nothing serious.
The insurance wrote it off as totaled.

So I ended up getting a Chevy 3500 four door dually.

Haven't hit a deer since

I've heard of deer doing that in an effort to avoid the collision. Often doing more damage than would have occurred if they hadn't jumped. I can't blame them for trying, but at that point they are at an extreme disadvantage.

I hit one at around 10 or 15 mph in a Dodge Neon. It wasn't a large deer. I knocked it down and sent it spinning along the pavement behind me. It got up and stumbled and staggered into the woods. No real damage to the car. More of a bump into it than a real impact.

I was going into work one night, driving slow, down hill and the timing was just bad. I looked to my left at the parking lot just as I caught movement from my right, but there was no time to respond and avoid it.

It was probably good for both of us that it was a low speed impact.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

My brother had a similar situation with a large eastern grey kangaroo doing the watusi on his lap.

Lap dance?

 

[cladking]

The fox is part of the rabbits environment and the rabbit is part of the foxes. Faster rabbits would select for faster foxes and vice versa when looking at speed alone. But at some point, the increased metabolism of speed has a negative impact.

Fitness advantages are not free.

Increases in Efficiency are less than free. This means little to life because all individuals aree very efficient. When new efficiencies arise they spread rapidly though the populations. But human activity is most highly inefficient. It does not improve because there is no profit to those who pull the strings. Higher efficiency means much higher populations of flatulent cows.

 

[John53]

Lap dance?

That could have been it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That could have been it.

You guys do things different in Oz.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Increases in Efficiency are less than free. This means little to life because all individuals aree very efficient. When new efficiencies arise they spread rapidly though the populations. But human activity is most highly inefficient. It does not improve because there is no profit to those who pull the strings. Higher efficiency means much higher populations of flatulent cows.

An incoherent ramble that doesn't say anything meaningful.

You're parsing problem seems to be getting worse.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Increases in Efficiency are less than free. This means little to life because all individuals aree very efficient. When new efficiencies arise they spread rapidly though the populations. But human activity is most highly inefficient. It does not improve because there is no profit to those who pull the strings. Higher efficiency means much higher populations of flatulent cows.

You don't have to try so hard. I already don't think there is any reason to take you seriously.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Isn't it true by definition that every grandparent all the way back to even the first lifeform was naturally selected. An individual today is the very pinnacle of creation and would be unimprovable except some are less fit.

The illogic in Darwin's thinking is extreme; Bad Darwin.

Your willful ignorance on the topic is showing again.
Once more you expose you have no clue what natural selection and biological fitness are really all about.

I can only call it willful ignorance because I can't even count the amount of times anymore that people have tried to talk some sense into you and corrected your mistakes, only to see you double - nay, tripple - down on your mistakes and merely repeat your false claims ad nauseum.

Tbh, it's pretty sad to watch.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This is false.

I have studied but not believed in evolution for nearly 70 years. I didn't know the Bible was full of truth until quite recently.

Bad Darwin.

Strange that after 70 years of supposed study, you still don't understand the basics of the basics of the basics.
Like what "fit" means.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Who died and left biologists to determine who is fit and who is not. Who died and left Hitler to make this determination? Bad Darwin.

Ow look, Godwin has arrived.

Bad Cladking

A frog born with five legs will not live long. Nature didn't intend any frog to have five legs.

Nature didn't intend anything

Nature doesn't have any intentions.

 

[cladking]

Strange that after 70 years of supposed study, you still don't understand the basics of the basics of the basics.
Like what "fit" means.

It's only natural you know more about the Bible than Bible scholars. Indeed, it's quite apparent believers in science no more about its meaning than the authors themselves!!!

I have never studied any subject at all by reading other peoples opinions. I read the experiments and look at the evidence. I have also observed the behavior of all of God's creatures and it is quite apparent they are misapprehended. Deer do far more than just fly through pickup trucks; they act in very clever ways. Even the least of creatures display awareness, intelligence, and curiosity. A bird is a thousand times more intelligent than people think it is and we aren't one millionth as smart as we think. Butterflies use resources we can hardly imagine to accomplish their own ends. We don't see this because we think they are dumb. We don't see it because we don't think like they do and we're waiting for squirrel to invent the unified field theorem.

When I read other peoples opinions it's because I want an overview and don't have time to research it.

 

[cladking]

Nature didn't intend anything

Nature doesn't have any intentions.

Give that man a cigar!!! It's exactly what I just said and the first thing you got right!

 

[cladking]

Once more you expose you have no clue what natural selection and biological fitness are really all about.

I don't know how many times I've said it, there's no such thing as survival of the fittest because all individuals are equally fit.

If you don't agree with this then show an experiment that demonstrates it.

I will not be in the least impressed when you pump poison into a population that kills only half of the individuals. All individuals are different but that does not mean those individuals more sensitive to specific poisons are any less fit. Nature never just selects populations to perform "experiments" for no reason.

If and when individuals are selected naturally those which die are never less fit than those which survive and the off spring of the survivors are more suited (more) fit FOR THAT SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENT than the species had been before the selections.

There most assuredly is a constant improvement going on in species but the definition of "improvement" is continually changing randomly so speciation rarely or never happens by this process. Bad Darwin.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's only natural you know more about the Bible than Bible scholars. Indeed, it's quite apparent believers in science no more about its meaning than the authors themselves!!!

???

We are talking about evolutionary biology.

I have never studied any subject at all by reading other peoples opinions. I read the experiments and look at the evidence. I have also observed the behavior of all of God's creatures and it is quite apparent they are misapprehended. Deer do far more than just fly through pickup trucks; they act in very clever ways. Even the least of creatures display awareness, intelligence, and curiosity. A bird is a thousand times more intelligent than people think it is and we aren't one millionth as smart as we think. Butterflies use resources we can hardly imagine to accomplish their own ends. We don't see this because we think they are dumb. We don't see it because we don't think like they do and we're waiting for squirrel to invent the unified field theorem.

When I read other peoples opinions it's because I want an overview and don't have time to research it.

What random things you write down here.

I can only repeat myself...
Odd that after supposedly 70 years of study, you still don't understand what "fit" means in evolutionary biology.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Give that man a cigar!!! It's exactly what I just said and the first thing you got right!

You gave the impression that you think nature has intentions.
I was just pointing out that it doesn't.