Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrobwoot
Evolution doesn't create anything for any reason. It means that mutations were created along the way. If the mutations survive and pass it on to the next generation, then the mutation stays. It is survival of the fittest, not necessarily creation of the fittest. So just because humans survived with their emotions, don't mean they are a benefit.
Look at field mice. Their diminutive stature is definitely no benefit. But they learned to work with it, so they are still around.
|
Here is something for you to consider about the whole "survival of the fittest thing". When you get right down to it, Darwinian evolution requires new information to be added to the DNA (ie, developing legs where none existed before). No living thing can develop a feature that was not coded in the DNA beforehand, since any feature requires a DNA "blueprint" in order to develop. Mutations cannot do this since a mutation is damage to an existing fragment of DNA. Damaging something does not make something new. Every microbiologist and geneticist will tell you that there is no known process that can add new informaiton to DNA...period. "Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that means nothing, and is actually contrary to Darwinian theory. If evolution progresses because of mutations and copying mistakes in DNA, then each generation that carries these DNA errors are inferior to the unaltered originals. They would no longer be "the fittest", and therefore, would not be the ones to pass their genes to the next generation. All theory aside, just look at nature today...when a member of a group of animals develops some weird genetic mistake, it is immediately isolated and it usually dies without reproducing. Then your "mutation" gets lost and not passed on. One good real-world observation is better than a million pages of untestable theory.