FA+
Shop
Evolution, intelligent design and unconsidered mechanics.
17 years ago
General
Suggested subject by 
badkera
Evolution is a fascinating subject and it seems to breed a lot of controversy, which generally indicates that it's really hard to understand. Most people with only limited knowledge of evolution will assume that natural selection is the defining factor that controls the change of species. However those with a bit more knowledge understand that it is merely one of the many factors that contributes to evolution.
There are a few more that people rarely consider. One I personally find interesting is called "lateral evolution". Basically lateral evolution is the process of dna being exchanged between different species that exist at the same time rather than in successive generations. The instruments of this exchange are interestingly enough: viruses. Yes viruses are an important part of the evolutionary process, they survive by injecting their dna into cells and then programming those cells to create more viruses. What often happens is a bit of that cell's dna winds up being copied into successive generations of that virus. These offspring can then spread to other compatible species and insert that DNA into them as well. This process has been observed and indicates why as the number of different species in an area increases so too does the rate of DNA mutation. In effect bio diversity accelerates evolution. This in effect gives the effect that all species interbreed on a cellular level; and as a result the boundaries that separate life are blurred.
Another concept that is only now starting to be realized is the concept of 'cellular intelligence'. You must keep in mind that cells are functional life forms and as a result they must have the means and instincts necessary to survive. Some of this intelligence can manifest in forms of communication, such as those observed between the nucleus containing cells of our own bodies. They can connect with one another and give off chemical signals to communicate with one another. Even simpler than that, DNA itself has been observed to have "intelligence", though it is more physical characteristic than intellect. Proteins will actually move towards one another or away from each other due to their chemical properties.
Another key that is sometimes touched upon is the idea that evolution does not "progress". All species are in fact perfectly suited for the environment within which they exist. This is why we don't have dinosaurs for example. They simply could not survive in the conditions the earth is in right now. The progression of species towards higher forms is just an illusion but one many tend to ignore given how evolution is often presented. We are not the pinnacle of evolution, we just happen to be perfectly suited for the state of the world as it is right now. Environmental change can make us less compatible but we'll change to suit it eventually.
Now for some more speculative stuff based on the points i've made. Consider that cells do possess some intelligence, what if that could allow them to respond to the will of the organism they compose? This could serve to induce mutation based on need, rather than trial and error. More importantly this could act very quickly. A potential example can be seen in some african elephants that have begun growing smaller, or no tusks, in response to poaching. This process has happened very quickly and is more than likely due to a mutation that increases their chance of breeding due to not being hunted. However given how beneficial this mutation is and how quickly it has manifested it might be attributed by the animal's need to not have the tusks anymore. I hope this subject receives some serious study as there may be some merit to it. This is essentially intelligent design, but driven by the intelligence of the cells themselves.
I'm also going to mention one more related subject and contributor to evolution. It may in fact be the single largest force of evolution in existence; the sun. The sun has a lot of wonderful properties and a lot of bad ones too, then there are those that we don't pay attention to despite knowing they exist. Solar radiation is surprisingly powerful and is capable of affecting DNA here on earth. Often this will result in random mutations or cell damage, but some people speculate that the effects are predictable to an extent. The sun's radiation has 3 different cycles. The shortest of which occurs approximately 12 times in one year, the next shortest is at an approximate 12 year cycle. The third is considerably longer and I'm too lazy to look it up. If you're familiar with astrology you might notice that those cycles correspond to both the western and chinese zodiacs. The idea is that the stars have no effect on you, but the massive ball of radiation in our own neighborhood does. This in effect means that the genes of everything on earth are affected by the sun and thus evolution may be happening faster than we may think.
Oh and if you're into that whole mayan calendar 2012 thingy. It corresponds to a period when the 3 solar cycles are in sync and the result will be a very large dose of solar radiation leading to drought and infertility and a potential axis shift. The last axis shift occurred on venus a few hundred years ago and is part of historical record. The mayan calendar merely predicts earth's approximate turn.
Nice tangent from evolution huh? :D
tl;dr: Cells are smart and we're all kinda like ninja turtles.
PS. There's also another theory, but it's much more complex and delves into non-linear time and the nature of consciousness as it acts as an integral component as to the substance of the universe. But I'm too lazy to get into that.
badkeraEvolution is a fascinating subject and it seems to breed a lot of controversy, which generally indicates that it's really hard to understand. Most people with only limited knowledge of evolution will assume that natural selection is the defining factor that controls the change of species. However those with a bit more knowledge understand that it is merely one of the many factors that contributes to evolution.
There are a few more that people rarely consider. One I personally find interesting is called "lateral evolution". Basically lateral evolution is the process of dna being exchanged between different species that exist at the same time rather than in successive generations. The instruments of this exchange are interestingly enough: viruses. Yes viruses are an important part of the evolutionary process, they survive by injecting their dna into cells and then programming those cells to create more viruses. What often happens is a bit of that cell's dna winds up being copied into successive generations of that virus. These offspring can then spread to other compatible species and insert that DNA into them as well. This process has been observed and indicates why as the number of different species in an area increases so too does the rate of DNA mutation. In effect bio diversity accelerates evolution. This in effect gives the effect that all species interbreed on a cellular level; and as a result the boundaries that separate life are blurred.
Another concept that is only now starting to be realized is the concept of 'cellular intelligence'. You must keep in mind that cells are functional life forms and as a result they must have the means and instincts necessary to survive. Some of this intelligence can manifest in forms of communication, such as those observed between the nucleus containing cells of our own bodies. They can connect with one another and give off chemical signals to communicate with one another. Even simpler than that, DNA itself has been observed to have "intelligence", though it is more physical characteristic than intellect. Proteins will actually move towards one another or away from each other due to their chemical properties.
Another key that is sometimes touched upon is the idea that evolution does not "progress". All species are in fact perfectly suited for the environment within which they exist. This is why we don't have dinosaurs for example. They simply could not survive in the conditions the earth is in right now. The progression of species towards higher forms is just an illusion but one many tend to ignore given how evolution is often presented. We are not the pinnacle of evolution, we just happen to be perfectly suited for the state of the world as it is right now. Environmental change can make us less compatible but we'll change to suit it eventually.
Now for some more speculative stuff based on the points i've made. Consider that cells do possess some intelligence, what if that could allow them to respond to the will of the organism they compose? This could serve to induce mutation based on need, rather than trial and error. More importantly this could act very quickly. A potential example can be seen in some african elephants that have begun growing smaller, or no tusks, in response to poaching. This process has happened very quickly and is more than likely due to a mutation that increases their chance of breeding due to not being hunted. However given how beneficial this mutation is and how quickly it has manifested it might be attributed by the animal's need to not have the tusks anymore. I hope this subject receives some serious study as there may be some merit to it. This is essentially intelligent design, but driven by the intelligence of the cells themselves.
I'm also going to mention one more related subject and contributor to evolution. It may in fact be the single largest force of evolution in existence; the sun. The sun has a lot of wonderful properties and a lot of bad ones too, then there are those that we don't pay attention to despite knowing they exist. Solar radiation is surprisingly powerful and is capable of affecting DNA here on earth. Often this will result in random mutations or cell damage, but some people speculate that the effects are predictable to an extent. The sun's radiation has 3 different cycles. The shortest of which occurs approximately 12 times in one year, the next shortest is at an approximate 12 year cycle. The third is considerably longer and I'm too lazy to look it up. If you're familiar with astrology you might notice that those cycles correspond to both the western and chinese zodiacs. The idea is that the stars have no effect on you, but the massive ball of radiation in our own neighborhood does. This in effect means that the genes of everything on earth are affected by the sun and thus evolution may be happening faster than we may think.
Oh and if you're into that whole mayan calendar 2012 thingy. It corresponds to a period when the 3 solar cycles are in sync and the result will be a very large dose of solar radiation leading to drought and infertility and a potential axis shift. The last axis shift occurred on venus a few hundred years ago and is part of historical record. The mayan calendar merely predicts earth's approximate turn.
Nice tangent from evolution huh? :D
tl;dr: Cells are smart and we're all kinda like ninja turtles.
PS. There's also another theory, but it's much more complex and delves into non-linear time and the nature of consciousness as it acts as an integral component as to the substance of the universe. But I'm too lazy to get into that.
I never thought about the sun actually effecting DNA.
Of course I've always been fond of the idea that nothing is real and that everything we experience is made up of a collective unconscious brought upon by self-identifying beings existing in a vacuum with a need for expression, but that's just me. :P
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/306190/
String theory time! I'm going to dimension hop through no more and no less than 14 different dimensions now!
Or whatever that random number physicists assigned to their theory to make all that money they're given to daydream seem worth it. :P
Still though: Subatomic particles are bouncing off of something we can't see. What is it?!
Oh well, I know that I've personally been to 14. I'm sure they'll catch up eventually.
Also you're right, they do work on a biochemical level, that's why it's so neat. :D
lol xD
I did read it all, and I agree that some people don't understand evolution completely, myself included.
and now I can't take out of my mind elephant DNA saying "take that, poachers!"
But I'm more curious about your statement on the 2012 thing. Drought, infertility, and an axis shift? Does that mean we all die? Or slowly die from not being able to reproduce? Or mass extinction? Climate change that will no doubt be linked to global warming?
Or will we wake up on January 1st, 2013, and nothing major will have changed? Or at least nothing major that can be noticed in everyday life.
At this point I think a drop in the birth rate would actually be a good thing XD
I hope I don't. :o But I stay inside 98% of the year, so I should be fine.
But the way you worded it made it sound more disastrous.
Anyway, the rest of what you said was enlightening. I believe in evolution and all, but I guess I only really thought of the whole "survival of the fittest" thing.
I'm still curious why our ancestors evolved the brain capacity that allowed for language and tool construction. I believe that once homo-sapians came around, the only major evolution was more of a social and intellectual evolution, though I think I heard that we're gradually growing taller. I'm not sure what importance that has. But what environmental need was there to evolve that basic intelligence? Was it simply the need to compete and survive against other species, or was there a more significant reason?
From what I've understood, intelligence is a trait that is arguably very beneficial to a species' survival. There's really only two efficient means of survival as a species, the first of which being survival by numbers, and the second being survival of individuals. Survival by numbers is essentially how and why there are so many insects, bacteria, and plants in the world - that their reproductive strategies are geared so that even if only a few of them survive, the species as a whole will recover and survive.
The second survival strategy is more so dependent on animals being able to adapt to their environment to ensure their individual survival, rather than simply having a lot of offspring. And god help you if you get an intelligent animal that produces a LOT of offspring, because you're going to have some serious consequences once all those hungry mouths need feeding. This has a lot to do with body size and more specifically brain size, since intelligent animals need far more food than mindless insects.
Learning and memory are desirable traits in this regard - if you know where food is (memory), and you know how to get it (learned through observation OR trial and error), then you've practically already gotten it. The basic idea goes that if a particular individual animal is pretty good at learning new experiences, and then remembering what to do when encountering similar situations, then it automatically has an advantage to survival over an animal that doesn't know what to do when encountering them. A Zebra that learns quickly to avoid Lions is going to have a much lower mortality rate than one that doesn't learn. This ability of memory and learning is also directly related to brain complexity as well.
Generally speaking, the more developed/complex an animal's brain is, the more likely it is going to survive as an individual to reproduce than an animal who propagates its' species through having LOTS of offspring. As an unintended consequence, animals with highly developed brains generally have a longer lifespan than those who do not - either as a result of them surviving longer, or through some other mechanism such as resistance to disease, or even just plain luck. You know very well not to eat ant poison - but an ant does not. Mammals survive longer than insects, if only because a mammal's brain gives it a much faster reaction time to a given stimulus than an ant's does.
If you take this basic idea and apply it to humans (or our ancestors rather), it becomes very quickly obvious that intelligence offers some very nifty survival advantages. Being able to tell your caveman friend to beware of poisonous snakes is all well and good when you have the time to do so - but shouting "Snake" when you see one (and him/her understanding its meaning) will give both of you a survival advantage.
Note that all this applies only toward the ABILITY to learn and rely on memory, NOT towards passing on these memories. Humans thus far are the only species who have figured out a way to do the second of these - mostly through storytelling, writing, and pictures.I'd say we've gotten pretty good at both.
awesome
ID has failed everytest and even the propaganda movie "Expelled" was so full of lies there is a lie correcting subtitles that place with the movie you can download.
...This whole issue is a serious interest of mine. :D
There very understanding and i could see how they could work out.
I thought mabye on that once but...the thoughs of DNA, viruses and the suiting indicators would explain a great deal about evolution.
And yeah, the Mayan's understood celestial dynamics and solar radiation. That's why they died out almost a thousand years ago.
But the point stands that at the same time their civilization withered from famine, the Muslim powers of the Middle East and certainly those of China were prospering. If whatever caused a decline in Central America was the result of Solar influence (not a bad theory given that the Little Ice Age was a few centuries to follow), why didn't it so much as hamper other peoples on the Earth?
Nevertheless, it's a wonderful idea to think about, and is perhaps one of the more interesting apocalypse myths out there. The ideas of the world ending, or at the very least undergoing severe changes, have been dated to happen on 1666 (the year of the London fire, but little else), 2000 (remember Y2K anyone?), and now 2012. Isaac Newton predicted the end of the world to happen no sooner then the late 21st century.
All I'm really getting at is that don't be planning on buying that new sports bike come Dec. 2011 and hoping not to have to make the payments.
"The Maya were aware of the planet's (venus) synodic period, and could compute it to within a hundredth part of a day"
They were pretty darn good at it :3
Not specifically to refure your point mifmaf, but I kept reading that someone said they died out.
so what david icke said is true? the earth will start turning backward in 2012?
well, over here where I live. because y'know, the time zones and all that stuff...
Would there be a risk of that collected sh*tstorm of solar bombardment causing a celestial EMP effect on us, though?
(also, I think there's also been evidence that the earth's polarity has historically shifted before, possibly from this, or possibly just on its own)
It's all a wonderful thing to imagine, and frankly--even from a purely scientific background--a fun mental exercise, but in the end, it's silly science. Ripped from Wikipedia (I know, purely empirical source and all ;) ) "Michael Tsarion and others think that an actual physical alignment of our entire solar system will occur with the horizontal plane of the Milky Way Galaxy on that day. The solar system is moving around the center of the galaxy every 225 million years or so, and while doing so is moving up and down in a cycle crossing the plane every 33 million years. According to the Journal Nature, however, there is evidence of the solar system crossing the galactic plane 3 million years ago. This would mean that we are moving away from the galactic plane, not toward it, and we will not be due to cross it for another 30 million years"
And by the mathematical theorum for gravity, *I* exert a greater gravitational force on the Earth (or any of you for that matter), then the supposed alignment of sun and galaxy.
*And*, this has no correlation with the magnetic pole reversal of the Earth, which is based on its own internal dinamo mechanism and not the sun.
Okay, I swear I'm done nerding out. Seriously, I think this is really great you guys. You don't really see such an intersting thread on Furaffinity very much, so all the power to you guys.
I think you may be overstating the importance of this cellular "intelligence" though. All it is is an ability to react to surroundings, and the feedback mechanisms can be quite simple. Having said that, there's no denying that it works - sometimes. Most of the time though (AFAIK) evolution is a combination of random change and selection. Without either it can't "work". though genetic drift and loss of function can happen at any time if there is no evolutionary pressure.
I wasn't aware that viruses had this specific impact on evolution though. (Or perhaps in their case, revolution.) Unless they overwrite DNA in cells that will be used in reproduction, the changes they inflict will not be carried into the next generation. (single-celled organisms are a different ball-game though, many can even purposefully exchange plasmids, without the need for a retrovirus)
Seriously, SO MANY JOURNALS in need of a +fav, especially with the upswing in ustream posts and all the journal-deleteds that they create.
tl;dr footnote is broken because it just makes me want to read the whole thing
WHAT'S THIS ABOUT NINJA TURTLES?
1) Most species do not live long past the end of their 'breeding years.'
2) From (1), a breeding male poached is removed before his breeding time is completed.
Now let us look at elephants in particular, If we consider the genes for the tusks to be on the Y chromosome, since it is a male-only trait, we will mark the elephants as follows:
Large tusked Male M
Small tusked Male m
Female f
Baby male, will grow up Large (M)
Baby male, will grow up Small (m)
Baby female (f)
We will also assume that females will choose to breed during a season, and that each season will produce one chile per female.
We'll start with a herd of 12, 3 large males, 3 small males and 6 females.
M M M m m m f f f f f f
Now each season, the poachers will kill one elephant for his tusks, then the rest will breed, pairing up one to one, with the extra females choosing whomever they can get. Genders of the kids will be determined randomly (coin flip) Children will take two seasons to mature, females will not breed while they still have a kid.
Starting herd: M M M m m m f f f f f f
Season 1: Poachers kill an elephant with big tusks
X M M m m m f f f f f f
Mating:
Mf Mf mf mf mf f(chooses #3, m)
Children:
Mf(M) Mf(M) mf(f) mf(f) mf(m) f(m)
Season 1 end herd: M M m m m f f f f f f (M) (M) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Season 2: Poachers kill an elephant with big tusks
X M m m m f f f f f f (M) (M) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Mating:
None, all females with kids
Season 2 end herd: M m m m f f f f f f (M) (M) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Season 3: Poachers kill an elephant with large tusks
X m m m f f f f f f (M) (M) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Mating:
None, all females with kids
Kids grow up into breeding adults
Season 3 end herd: M M m m m m m f f f f f f f f
Season 4: Poachers kill an elephant with large tusks
X M m m m m m f f f f f f f f
Mating:
Mf mf mf mf mf mf f(#4, m) f(#3, m)
Children
Mf(f) mf(m) mf(f) mf(m) mf(m) mf(m) f(m) 3f(m)
Season 4 end herd: M m m m m m f f f f f f f f (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Season 5: Poachers kill an elephant with large tusks:
X m m m m m f f f f f f f f (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (f) (f)
Simulation terminated, no large-tusked elephants remain in herd
The elephants aren't 'choosing' to grow small tusks to make themselves less attractive to poachers, the poachers are selecting the small-tusked elephants to carry on to the next generation by removing the large-tusked elephants from the gene pool.
There are better ones, but they mostly deal with cosmetic changes that don't influence survival.
"We are not the pinnacle of evolution, we just happen to be perfectly suited for the state of the world as it is right now. Environmental change can make us less compatible but we'll change to suit it eventually."
That gave me pause though. When you think about it, humans *aren't* evolving anymore, are we? Sure, we are technically, but when you look at it compared to other species, we are one hell of an abberation. In the most developed areas of the world, humans have virtually eliminated the threat of natural predators, have developed medical technology to cure those who would otherwise die off, use buildings to shield us from nature's effects, and give absolutely no thought to what genes we pass on when we breed. These are very broad statements and nowhere near always true, of course. What i mean is, humanity has taken the unique turn of evolving our *environment* to suit our bodies, rather than the other way around. I'm not sayin' we should throw all the sickly babies into a trash compactor at birth (although the thought does bring a smile to my face...) but I'd at least like to see more people think; "I have genes for passing on a debilitating hereditary disease. Maybe I should adopt instead."
Think about it, When your parents were kids, a 'computer' was either a cute blond in a skirt or an 'idiot savant' (to use the old term from that era) who did the math calculations MY HAND with pencil or paper (or just blurted out the correct answer, in the case of the savants) while the REAL mathematician or engineer did all the 'hard work,' making sure the problems he was giving to the calculators were correctly formatted to give the result he was expecting.
When your parents were kids, you rarely talked to anyone in a different city because communication was so expensive, now we can speak to people on the other side of the planet quickly and easily, WITHOUT UTTERING A SINGLE SOUND.
When your parents were kids, the forward thinking parents (your grandparents) would be pushing for their kids to get a High School Diploma, since that would open up any job the kid wanted. Now you need a Bachelor Degree to get HALF that amount of job access.
As we change the world, we force ourselves to change along with it.
NOT TRUE. I often fart.
>As we change the world, we force ourselves to change along with it.
Yes, but 'change' is not the same as biological evolution. The way we adapt to new technology and such may share some similarities, but it really doesn't resemble the kind of evolution all other species go through. That's all I'm saying. As far as physical evolution goes, we are not doing too well, and I think the humans portrayed in Wall-E are a highly likely outcome for us.
<fart>
The concepts of lateral evolution and cellular intelligence are new to me, although I've heard breifly of the latter before. I agree with you that evolution is not just a continual 'forward march'. There was a case in Britan not too long ago, where they had a localized explosion of 'orange frogs', that didn't last very long. Being orange kinda makes you stand out, and become a bigger target for predators. An experiment on Mother Nature's part, that just didn't generate good results.
On the subject of the sun, I find that it's role in triggering mutations is a possibility, but not a leading cause. it's true that it forms the major keystone in the chain of life on the Earth's surface. But it's been discovered that life is capable of living without light, as long as HEAT energy is present. Look up the studies on the deep hydrothermal vents and the small creature communities that cluster around them. People are thinking that this may be happening on further planets, like Jupiter's moon, Europa. It's shown itself to be geologically active, so, who knows?
Not to discount the sun's critical influence on evolution for the last 3.8 billion years, but it is simply from visible light and heat. The radiation that does pass through the earth comes from stars far more distant and more massive than our own.
http://resources.yesican-science.ca.....icle_info.html
Though I do stand corrected. The sun does emit higher frequency EM radiation (X-ray and gamma) in solar flares, which happen almost continuously (the Earth gets hit every few years by them).
Meh, what do I know? My major's in physics, not astrophysics.
Now, are we still evolving? I'd say yes. Consider how much taller each suceeding generation is than the last. Consider how much bigger our boobs are than our parents and grandparents.
Mifmaf, I agree entirely with what you said, with the tiny exception of the source of the intelligence behind the cells. I've taken a lot of flak from fellow Christians for this idea, but I personally think that it is God guiding their development over time, since the entire process of adaptation does hint at intelligent design - a sort of biological auto-update program, much like you get for most computer software. That to me seems like someone planned our design to do that.
But that's just what I think. Awesome read, Mifmaf! =3
Great post 8) I hoep I don't die and become infertile in 2012.
We haven't, as a species, evolved much lately because we adapt the environment. Of course, by making the environment adaptable, we've changed a bit ourselves, since we no longer need traits that enabled us to survive before. So we still did change, just not as much as some other species.
"Intelligent Design" greatly annoys me, because I've yet to find a single argument for it that made any sense. Even when you get one that isn't, "God is Good, God is Great, God gives us, Chocolate Cake" or whatever, the arguments are generally completely invalid or also supported by evolution. There's one of ID people claiming that the theory that a freak chemical reaction resulted in the first amino acids and such was bogus... by using an example of a jar of peanut butter failing to have new life inside when opened. Or my personal favorite, the way bananas are "perfectly made to fit the human hand". The fact that it's started by a subset of Christians (and the subset to give the religion a bad name) out of being butthurt by the whole "No mandated religion in schools" thing doesn't give it a good starting position either.
Uhh, I think I had more here, but it's 6:30 AM, so I think I'm gonna fall asleep now. Plus, there were a couple that already got answered better than I could, so yeah.