|
Not Ranked
:
+0 / -0
0 score
RE: tell me one beneficial mutation example - if there is
A bit off topic but interesting in light of trying to refute evolution by talking about instant mutations.
There are many examples which are not instant but which have taken tens of thousands, often millions, of years to develop.
Our big brains come at a huge cost for humanity. It is twofold: first, in order for babies to be able to squeeze through the mother's pelvis they need collapsible skulls which means smaller heads which means undeveloped brains. Whereas baby chimps can cling to their mothers within very short periods after their birth, human babies lack even the most basic of survival instincts. And secondly, because it takes so long for the brains to develop and for the individual to acheive sexual maturity, adults have to spend up to 18-20 years of their life bringing up their kids. That is second to none in the animal kingdom.
That our society can survive even though most adults spend more than 1/3rd of their lives tending to the needs of the young is incredible. So there must be some evolutionary advantage to it. Why can a newborn horse stand up after mere minutes, while an infant human takes about 12-18 months to learn to walk? Why can some animals communicate almost immediately after birth, while babies can't utter anything but gurgling for a long time? Because our huge brain capacity takes an enormous toll on our existence. That is the price we pay to be smart. It is not inevitable that humanity will continue to survive with these traits.
Considering we live in a very polluted world where a lot of the margins are crossed (like the level of NOx in the athmosphere, and the level of carbon soaked up in trees, oceans, and rocks) a major volcanic eruption or asteroid impact could easily make life difficult for 20-30 years. If the catastrophe wiped out, say, half the human population, ruined our infrastructure, darkened the skies, and polluted the air - how long would humaity survive? It could be over in a decade. THAT'S what evolution is about. Because suddenly human beings - so excellent at adapting - would no longer be able to adapt because the environment would be too harsh for our kinds.
Some humans would inevitably survive, though, and in a few generations there would probably be no need for the incredible brains. Speech could degenerate. We could grow smaller. We would have no need for advanced technology (and nobody would be around to build it) so we'd have to relearn all the skills from the bottom up - farming, making stone tools, how to kill game for food.
And with that, the human species would no longer be the dominant species on this planet. It would have lasted perhaps a hundred thousand years, out of which perhaps 5,000 were marked by high civilzation. Compare that to the 100 million years of the rule of the dinosaurs. Or the longevity of the crocodile. Or the sea turtle.
In the long run, humans - and the other primates - are not the ones who have been around for too long, and there is really nothing for us to say we would be around for too many more millennia.
----------------
 Your Friendly Neighborhood Administrator
Want to lose the advertisements? Become a Sponsor!
Join our Facebook group or follow us on Twitter
Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
- Carl Sagan |
