|
Krawnikal (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
Yeah and if natural selection is all it's made up to be then male primapes shouldn't have nipples and we shouldn't have as many hair follicles as we do should we?
Krawnikal (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
I find it funny that people gave me a thumbs down for my comment, but couldn't give me a real scientific reason why, and I doubt any 'answers' that evolution may have will totally answer my questions.
Leon61294 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
actually i thought maybe he's right. If humans are evolved from ape then why now for over millenias, humans stops evolving?
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
Aside from the matter, Natural Selection doesn't even need to BUILD new components, the components are already there, but sometimes in very low numbers of a species or population. There were always people with immunity to HIV. But with HIV spreading, in another thousand years or so we might see more of them. Would we have known about them if the environment hadn't promoted the spread of HIV? No. When the environment changes,and the structures are needed,they will be expressed in the population.
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
You should be paying me for this education by the way...
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
Are you going to ask me a completely different question every time I answer your previous ones? And ONCE AGAIN, if you had read my previous posts, nobody says natural selection is the process which FORMS life, it is the process by which life changes.
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
What about nylonase? The NEW digestive enzyme found in bacteria which allows them to digest nylon? Or lizards developing entirely NEW structures in their digestive tracts to digest certain types of vegetation, in as few as 30 years? Or the foxp2 mutation which allows for complex communication in humans?
therflo13 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
A lot of "what ifs" to support an "if". "then those organisms with that gene for a defective flagellum would eventually be thinned from the gene pool." Is an example of how natural selection can only be used for deconstruction of components of the cell. Which begs the question: if it can only remove parts that are useless and cannot produce new beneficial parts, is natural selection really the process which forms life?
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
Unless the environment changes and causes the flagellum to be a detriment to the organism's survival. Then those with "defective" flagellum would thrive and eventually dominate the population. But thanks to mutations most organisms have a handy way of adapting to a changing environment. People born with webbed feet may seem weird to you, but if sea levels rose and forced humans to become aquatic animals, they would have an easier time obtaining food and more success in the environment.
mxnad535 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)
If some of the flagellum are defective in an environment that favors bacteria with flagellum, then those organisms with that gene for a defective flagellum would eventually be thinned from the gene pool. That doesn't mean that there will never be any bacteria with defective flagellum in the population, but there will be less and less as time goes on. |
