Learned and Adapted Behaviors

[nPeace]

Yes, I don't know where you are going with this?

This is standard knowledge in regards to how we learn. You didn't know a hippo ate meat, so you thought they didn't, then you found a video clip showing you this and now you have updated your knowledge about hippos.

Speak for yourself.
You don't know me.
I knew many many years ago, that hippos killed crocodiles... which are terrified of them. Lol
I never assumed they ate meat, or did not.
Your admittance of updated knowledge is not mine.

If you take something like dark matter and dark energy, the scientist thinks that this could be an explanation, but they don't go out claiming it to be true.

In the case of the hippo, this new knowledge doesn't change the fact that hippos still prefer eating plants or whatever, so our former knowledge wasn't wrong, it simply wasn't a full explanation.

That's not the point.

Well because I don't think what you wrote is relevant in regards to evolution and what food animals eat. There is a whole digestion system and animal anatomy involved, a food chain etc. It's like asking whether a cow could suddenly start hunting other animals and eat them because it suddenly "preferred" to be a carnivore. It is irrelevant when it depends on so much more, and I don't see how that would be possible, given how evolution works.

No comparrison there. Eating is not the same as a wolf becoming a sheep.

 

[Left Coast]

So you are saying that a lion would rather starve to death, than eat anything other than vegetation.
If that's what you believe...

No I'm saying that like a starving man eating rocks or feces, the lion might try it if you tortured them enough. But it wouldn't be good for them. They would get sick and die anyway.

And also, why would anyone do that to the poor lion?

I always believed in evolution / adaptation.
Word games are what evolutionist play.
All Christians, Muslims, etc. believe in change - another word for evolution. We evolve every day.
I don't believe in the theory of evolution.
There is a difference, I hope you know.

But the link you provided explains a process that is part of the theory. So you believe that's real, then?

 

[nPeace]

No I'm saying that like a starving man eating rocks or feces, the lion might try it if you tortured them enough. But it wouldn't be good for them. They would get sick and die anyway.

And also, why would anyone do that to the poor lion?

Oh. Only rocks and feces exist.
can we have a serious discussion?

How about fruit... and no one is there to force the lion?
You simply don't know... but these frivolous statements you are making are just meaningless, and sounds like something children would say, but they don't know better. You do.

So can you be serious.
Talk fruit. You are saying they would not eat the fruit, and they will die, if they do, and no changes would occur to pass on to their offspring?

But the link you provided explains a process that is part of the theory. So you believe that's real, then?

Please explain this "part of the theory" bit.
Are you saying that to believe in procreation, is to believe in the theory of evolution? Or is procreation not a process that is part of the theory?

 

[Left Coast]

Oh. Only rocks and feces exist.
can we have a serious discussion?

You wanted to use analogies. I was simply improving on your original.

How about fruit... and no one is there to force the lion?
You simply don't know... but these frivolous statements you are making are just meaningless, and sounds like something children would say, but they don't know better. You do.

So can you be serious.
Talk fruit. You are saying they would not eat the fruit, and they will die, if they do, and no changes would occur to pass on to their offspring?

I'm saying if you tortured them they might eat the fruit. But it would not be nutritionally sufficient for them, and they'd get sick and die anyway. Lions are obligate carnivores. They require meat to survive. This is really not tough to comprehend.

Please explain this "part of the theory" bit.
Are you saying that to believe in procreation, is to believe in the theory of evolution? Or is procreation not a process that is part of the theory?

I'm saying that to believe in the concept of evolutionary pressures that cause genetic shifts in a population resulting in speciation is, for all intents and purposes, what the theory of evolution is predicated on. So it's bizarre to believe in that concept but then arbitrarily not believe where that process logically leads us.

 

[nPeace]

You wanted to use analogies. I was simply improving on your original.

It was not improved, but... how should I say... poorly misunderstood, and totally destroyed. It's now useless - meaningless.

I'm saying if you tortured them they might eat the fruit. But it would not be nutritionally sufficient for them, and they'd get sick and die anyway. Lions are obligate carnivores. They require meat to survive. This is really not tough to comprehend.

You ran an experiment, and found that out?

I'm saying that to believe in the concept of evolutionary pressures that cause genetic shifts in a population resulting in speciation is, for all intents and purposes, what the theory of evolution is predicated on. So it's bizarre to believe in that concept but then arbitrarily not believe where that process logically leads us.

I'm saying a body of evidence is not limited to one belief system.
Humans exerting evolutionary pressure

Processes are what occurs every day. Claiming they support a belief does not actually mean that is true.

 

[Jose Fly]

I always believed in evolution / adaptation.

Should I Believe in Evolution? (jw.org)

"If evolution is true, life has no lasting purpose."

Huh.

 

[Quintessence]

Thanks. So with your little knowledge, a body that lacks the enzymes or intestinal bacteria necessary needs to remain that way ...

Generally, yes. Take the example of lactose intolerance in humans. Humans who are lactose intolerant do not produce enough of the necessary enzyme to digest the lactose in milk. They are unable to properly digest milk, and they can't suddenly start being able to digest milk either short of some sort of medical intervention.

That said, gene expression can be variable for certain processes and be mediated by various cues, both environmental and internal. But there are limits to this sort of adaptation, which certainly doesn't cross into the territory of lions suddenly being able to survive on a vegetarian diet. Rather like how humans can't suddenly be like the various species capable of regrowth of limbs. If you loose a finger, it's staying that way.

 

[Left Coast]

You ran an experiment, and found that out?

I, personally, need to run a study to find that out?

Do I also need to personally run a study to find out what'll happen if I throw a lion off a cliff?

You want to be serious. So cmon now. Be serious. Lions are obligate carnivores, sir. This isn't hard to comprehend.

I'm saying a body of evidence is not limited to one belief system.
Humans exerting evolutionary pressure

Processes are what occurs every day. Claiming they support a belief does not actually mean that is true.

Humans are only one type of evolutionary pressure. And what occurs everyday accumulates over time. So if the process occurs again, and again, and again...guess where we end up? Biodiversity! The tree of life!

 

[JDMS]

Do I also need to personally run a study to find out what'll happen if I throw a lion off a cliff?

Of course you do! We need to find out if the pressure would cause hormones to activate and make the lion grow wings... it's not a ridiculous theory! If you've never tried it, you have no way of knowing.

 

[nPeace]

I, personally, need to run a study to find that out?

Do I also need to personally run a study to find out what'll happen if I throw a lion off a cliff?

Yes.

You want to be serious. So cmon now. Be serious. Lions are obligate carnivores, sir. This isn't hard to comprehend.

I'm serious.
What are the factors?
How high is the cliff?
Is there a water bed below? Cushions? etc.

Assuming that no mechanisms exist to allow the lion to adapt, is not doing science... properly.

It's like handling in you paper and saying it's a done deal. No need to verity it.

Humans are only one type of evolutionary pressure.

Exactly! ...and there are many many pressures that cause change... like the pressures you guys put on a person to go mad.

And what occurs everyday accumulates over time. So if the process occurs again, and again, and again...guess where we end up? Biodiversity! The tree of life!

I've been going to the bathroom everyday, and I never seen a fork in my toilet. So no. That's wishful thinking.

 

[nPeace]

Generally, yes. Take the example of lactose intolerance in humans. Humans who are lactose intolerant do not produce enough of the necessary enzyme to digest the lactose in milk. They are unable to properly digest milk, and they can't suddenly start being able to digest milk either short of some sort of medical intervention.

That said, gene expression can be variable for certain processes and be mediated by various cues, both environmental and internal. But there are limits to this sort of adaptation, which certainly doesn't cross into the territory of lions suddenly being able to survive on a vegetarian diet. Rather like how humans can't suddenly be like the various species capable of regrowth of limbs. If you loose a finger, it's staying that way.

There are barriers?
I've never heard a believer of the evolution theory admit that.
Some here have even asked, what's to stop it - that is, small changes adding up to bigger ones - happening?
Surprised you see it differently... or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[Left Coast]

Yes.

Really? So you believe nothing unless you, personally, run an experiment to see what happens when you try it?

I'm serious.
What are the factors?
How high is the cliff?
Is there a water bed below? Cushions? etc.

Assuming that no mechanisms exist to allow the lion to adapt, is not doing science... properly.

There's no assumption. You understand that there are biologists who study lions for a living, yes? They're not an alien species. We understand their diet. We understand how their digestive systems work. This is not a new area of study.

Exactly! ...and there are many may pressures that cause change... like the pressures you guys put on a person to go mad.

Or the pressures you exert on us to explain basic things to you!

I've been going to the bathroom everyday, and I never seen a fork in my toilet. So no. That's wishful thinking.

Well there's a weird apples/oranges comparison.

Maybe skip analogies for the rest of the day. You're not doing well with them.

 

[nPeace]

Really? So you believe nothing unless you, personally, run an experiment to see what happens when you try it?

Let's just say I don't believe mere assumptions.

There's no assumption. You understand that there are biologists who study lions for a living, yes? They're not an alien species. We understand their diet. We understand how their digestive systems work. This is not a new area of study.

I hear that all the time.
I also hear things like this quite often.
Scientists have been getting this wrong about hippopotamus for years.
...scientists have recently begun to uncover some exceptional behaviors that may change our view of animals again, especially their seemingly limited diet.

...and I hear scientists calling out other scientists, on their hubris.
Then I hear a few honest scientists tell us, they don't know everything, and so, what they believe may not be the full picture.
They understand that science is an ongoing study, and don't support the idea that such beliefs are conclusive.

Or the pressures you exert on us to explain basic things to you!

Wait. Seriously?
Well you guys would have to be mad already, to explain something to someone for three years.
I don't believe you are mad. I think your ego just gets the best of you, as you stroke it into becoming too big for you to control it.

Well there's a weird apples/oranges comparison.

Maybe skip analogies for the rest of the day. You're not doing well with them.

You're right. I don't do well with those who aren't teachable.

 

[Left Coast]

Let's just say I don't believe mere assumptions.

Lion biology isn't assumed. Again, it's been studied. Their digestive system does not allow them to live on plants like other animals.

I hear that all the time.
I also hear things like this quite often.
Scientists have been getting this wrong about hippopotamus for years.
...scientists have recently begun to uncover some exceptional behaviors that may change our view of animals again, especially their seemingly limited diet.

...and I hear scientists calling out other scientists, on their hubris.
Then I hear a few honest scientists tell us, they don't know everything, and so, what they believe may not be the full picture.
They understand that science is an ongoing study, and don't support the idea that such beliefs are conclusive.

Not knowing everything doesn't mean anything is therefore possible or equally plausible.

Wait. Seriously?

Yes seriously. That we have to explain to you that if you try to feed a lion nothing but apples it's not gonna go well is...really, really ****ing basic.

I don't believe you are mad. I think your ego just gets the best of you, as you stroke it into becoming too big for you to control it.

You're right. I don't do well with those who aren't teachable.

Physician, heal thyself!

 

[VoidCat]

Hey @nPeace
Just admit if you dont know basic lion biology. Ive been reading this thread it's a train wreck. You say sometimes scientists dont know stuff. Im sure there's stuff you dont know. In my opinion it's better to admit if you dont know something and it seems this thread shows how little you know about this topic

 

[Quintessence]

There are barriers?
I've never heard a believer of the evolution theory admit that.
Some here have even asked, what's to stop it - that is, small changes adding up to bigger ones - happening?
Surprised you see it differently... or am I misunderstanding you?

You're misunderstanding, or we're having two different conversations.

I realize biological evolution has entered into this conversation from other posters, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about processes operating within a single organism of a species; rapid changes in an individual organism that would somehow allow a carnivore to survive off grass. I explained that this is not how it works, on the individual and organismal level.

The individual and organismal level is not the level at which evolution operates. Evolution is change in entire populations of organisms over time.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Can you please show me where you read "in a lion's lifetime" in anything I wrote.

You said "Can rapid changes take place in the body". Unless you have some new fangled version of rapid, it is normally understand that such change in a body would be well within the lifetime of whatever organism being referred too. In this case, lions.

You gave a year for your "guy" whatever that meant. If human, lion or hippo, it would also be in their lifetimes.

Now can you answer my question?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I am not a scientist, but you are. Do you believe scientists are right about everything they believe?

That depends on what you mean by believe. Scientists have beliefs too as well as knowledge. Scientists don't know everything. Otherwise, we wouldn't need science. But I do believe that most know more than some examples I can think of.

Not knowing everything doesn't mean they don't have subject matter expertise in the subjects they study.

Do you think you know more than scientists that study the things you speculate on?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Oh. Only rocks and feces exist.
can we have a serious discussion?

How about fruit... and no one is there to force the lion?
You simply don't know... but these frivolous statements you are making are just meaningless, and sounds like something children would say, but they don't know better. You do.

So can you be serious.
Talk fruit. You are saying they would not eat the fruit, and they will die, if they do, and no changes would occur to pass on to their offspring?


Please explain this "part of the theory" bit.
Are you saying that to believe in procreation, is to believe in the theory of evolution? Or is procreation not a process that is part of the theory?

So you are claiming that a lion can change from a carnivore to a herbivore when starved and offered only fruit as a food source within the lifetime of the lion.

What was all the hubbub about before? I actually understood what you were claiming. You should be happy about that.

It isn't going to happen, but I understand the claim.

I know it is part of my theory. At least the practice of it.

Evolution would not occur without variation that was heritable. Normally this is done by procreation where I'm from.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I think the definition here is simple enough.

1. a substance produced by a living organism which acts as a catalyst to bring about a specific biochemical reaction.

So that's a yes... certain released hormones, triggers... whatever we want to call them, play a role in producing change... even if that change is gradual?

Hormones and enzymes are not the same thing.