Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No I'm making the assumption that natural selection should retain the advantageous traits, not discard them.
That is a poor and baseless assumption to make. Natural Selection is an economizer. It will "happily" discard things that are no longer required or necessary in order to minimize the usage of resources. It has no foresight or plan or goal.
The trait has to be _actually_ advantageous. Not just one you personally feel would be better to have. And in terms of the things you listed, none of them confer enough of an advantage, especially since the advent of culture and clothing, to warrant keeping them.
So you can list all day traits that would be "better" to have, but in the end they have to be more than just "better", they have to genuinely have an impact on reproductive success at a species level, not just at the level of one or two individuals who stubbed their toe one day.
I think of the oddity of some guy who HATES "baseball," doesn't want to watch it or play it himself, but who minutely complains about "The Rules of Baseball" and wants the game abandoned or even banned …
*shrug*
I dunno … Go Figure ...
Only if "baseball" was trying to force everyone to play, or at the very least, watch and listen. Only if it were trying to get laws passed and drag our society back several decades.
Analogies like this only go to prove that you guys have no clue how the other side thinks, and why we say and do the things we do.
I could turn it around on you and say this:
I think the oddity of some guy who LOVES "baseball", wants to watch it and play it himself, but who minutely complains about "the people who don't love it" but wants the game to be played or watched by everyone.
That is more in line with your ilk's thinking than your analogy with ours.
Only if "baseball" was trying to force everyone to play, or at the very least, watch and listen. Only if it were trying to get laws passed and drag our society back several decades.
Analogies like this only go to prove that you guys have no clue how the other side thinks, and why we say and do the things we do.
I could turn it around on you and say this:
I think the oddity of some guy who LOVES "baseball", wants to watch it and play it himself, but who minutely complains about "the people who don't love it" but wants the game to be played or watched by everyone.
That is more in line with your ilk's thinking than your analogy with ours.
As if some Atheist don't push and promote their ideology on others?
The why are human beings so adapted poorly for survival? Even primates have better survival physical bodies. They are stronger physically and have thick padded feet. Human beings? Without shoes, our feet would be a mess. Why would evolution evolve humans with weaker feet and sensitive skin that burns easily under the sun? Looks like the opposite should have occurred.
Human beings are much more susceptible to disease and cancer than even our supposely primate relatives.
If we really evolved from primates then evolution really sucks at survival.
Says the guy whose species lives on every continent in nearly every conceivable habitat and is respoonsible for causing the extinction of thousand upon thousands of other species.
Humans are probably the best adapted for survival of any of the higher order species. I think we could still learn a thing or two from cockroaches, though.
Says the guy whose species lives on every continent in nearly every conceivable habitat and is respoonsible for causing the extinction of thousand upon thousands of other species.
Humans are probably the best adapted for survival of any of the higher order species. I think we could still learn a thing or two from cockroaches, though.
Seems like evolution adapts every other species towards their environment, but it just one day decided, hey let's make humans were they can survive anywhere on a variety of food. Sure seems like evolution has a mind behind it.
As if some Atheist don't push and promote their ideology on others?
If by "push and promote" you mean keeping you guys (Not you specifically, but the religious in general) from establishing a theocracy, then yea, we do. If wanting the world to be a better a place, and have educated children, and equal rights, and so on is a bad thing, then I think you should look in the mirror. You are the problem.
If by "push and promote" you mean keeping you guys (Not you specifically, but the religious in general) from establishing a theocracy, then yea, we do. If wanting the world to be a better a place, and have educated children, and equal rights, and so on is a bad thing, then I think you should look in the mirror. You are the problem.
If by "push and promote" you mean keeping you guys (Not you specifically, but the religious in general) from establishing a theocracy, then yea, we do. If wanting the world to be a better a place, and have educated children, and equal rights, and so on is a bad thing, then I think you should look in the mirror. You are the problem.
Your side is doing a fabulous job at making the world a worse place. I feel sorry for the future generations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
