Jump to content
Science Forums

Evolution = slow, technology = fast


alxian

Recommended Posts

first off sorry if its been suggested

 

basically that it may take a billion or more years to evolve the bodies and population, but only a tiny amount of time for civilization to create highly intelligent cultures.

 

many documentaries and popular theory tell you that life on this planet took ages to develop.

 

could that have been due to the time it takes terrestrial life (generally aerobic) migrating from continent to continent?

 

i.e. this planet allowed for rich pocket of life to evolve and inter polinate while preserving the unique nature of cultures

 

plus the evolution of intelligence (civilzation and technology) our species only took a very small amount of time. bacially sparked by all the disperate cultures connecting up to each other.

 

some of the newer documentaries though are saying such evolution of life is very rare and perhaps totally unique to earth.

 

but if any species reaches as large a population as ours, has access to resources and the ability to exploit them, with communication and ability to manipulate their environment shouldn't take an eye blink for them to attain the same technological enlightenment as humans?

 

i.e. as long as a planet can harbour several patches of evolved life (that would compete for resources), as long as they didn't use technology to kill themselves off its reasonable that they should evolve very quickly technologically.

 

it would become a question of what would stall their technological advancement, for humans its war and resource scarcity and silly moral quandries.

 

not that other beings would be immoral (that would preclude a moral aversion to the natural drive to fight for resources.) but that humans arguably aren't exactly moral creatures by default.

 

 

so. evolution takes ages, but technological advancement is extremely fast after the culture becomes stable, be that agrarian or what ever is required to support a billion strong (subjective) society living in one spot or accross the face of a planet.

 

that once a species (or group of symbiotic) races reaches resource stability civilization is guaranteed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The evolution of human consciousness, culture and technology might be a part of a quickening in evolution. If one thinks of it these changes have increased life expectancy and hold the promise of getting better results from the DNA that humans and other lifeforms contain; Culture is learning to evolve the DNA. This positive DNA evolution is no longer a random mutation but is due to directed or orderred interaction by humans and technology. This speeds the whole evolutionary process up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By definition, “evolution”, is classified as an alien to the natural order of creation. Evolution is not a natural process to where creation can evolve by itself, regardless of the time frame. Evolution, is the invader that alters, the original design of creation, by a process of outside modification.

 

This may strongly suggest that creation came first. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

basically that it may take a billion or more years to evolve the bodies and population, but only a tiny amount of time for civilization to create highly intelligent cultures.

Evolution has stopped for human males or at least we are evolving but for the worst.

There is a sunset clause on the Y chromosome which will lead to male extinction. Future civilizations will be made up of one sex, female. Internal reproduction will be replaced by cloning of females. With cloning evolution will stop as evolution does not happen over the life span of a human and cloning is just an identical copy. Of course this is what I believe but there are a few others who share my beliefs.

 

Here's some interesting articles that explain the causes but do not give a possible solution for this future problem.

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/171_11_061299/trounson/trounson.html

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/helthrpt/stories/s73264.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Cambrian sea 530 million years ago a the biological singularity occurred suddenly when genetic information reached a critical threshold connected the individual eukaryote cell into complex morphology bringing about cognition.

Just as these cells were connected in the distant past, The technological singularity will occur as the individual human is connected into a cognitive cohesive whole. This whole becoming greater than the sum of its parts.

 

 

quote:

 

catastrophe theory

Mathematical theory developed by René Thom in 1972, in which he showed that the growth of an organism proceeds by a series of gradual changes that are triggered by, and in turn trigger, large-scale changes or ‘catastrophic’ jumps. It also has applications in engineering – for example, the gradual strain on the structure of a bridge that can eventually result in a sudden collapse – and has been extended to economic and psychological events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at evolution as a movement toward lowering of potential. The formation of stars from a stellar cloud evolved through the natural potential of gravity to create spherical shapes called stars. These shapes lead to fusion. The fusion leads to production of new atoms. These atoms then use natural potentials of nature to form molecules. The background potentials on the early earth led to the natural formation of the soup of life. The changing earth allowed the process to go on further with the evolution of life.

 

Science has gotten so fixated on genetics and mutations that it seems that something unnatural has somehow overlapped natural forward progress. The DNA template is important but how does the template form itself? The template of atoms, which are the atomic nuclei and orbitals are based on nuclear and EM force. The template of DNA is based on the Hydrogen proton and hydrogen bonding.

 

If we took away the EM force and the nuclear force, the templates of atoms and molecules would disperse back to sub-particles, i.e, early universe. If will took away gravity the stars would regress back to the original clouds of hydrogen gas. If we take away hydrogen bonding, all life would regress back to the sludgy soup of life. The most abundant material of the universe, i.e., hydrogen, continues to evolve within life and is the potential and orderring principle of life.

 

One possible theory for such a potential has to do with fusion. When we fuse hydrogen to make other atoms energy is given off due to mass burn. This implies that hydrogen protons are different that all other nuclear protons, in that they contain extra potential. Within the chemistry of life the hydrogen protons are the oldest or the parents of all the atoms and chemicals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

so what you're saying is a higher power created man, but nature wants only women

 

that i believe is the strongest argument for creationism, at least the sumerian versionm i've ever heard.

 

it would explain why so many other mammals reproduce sexually while ancient animals like insect reproduce asexually.

 

god created man and woman, nature prefers cloning. woohoo

 

 

 

if man takes control of his procreation i do not believe evolution will stop. man can and will prefect his genome. creating supermen an chimera of all flavours. hopefully a federal reserve will stockpile all of our (natural) genetic diversity before it is lost for ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well isnt technology just evolution?

no, what is the purpose of technology?

all other animals live just fine without it.

technology is another one of the many things that sets us apart from all the other animals.

it is also prof of god. is intelligence natural, no. is intelligence wide spead, no, only humans have it and the means to use it.

notice also that is was the tree of knowledge that adam and eve ate of.

after they ate they began to build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting...i disagree completely, becuase i, for one, do not believe in a god but i definatley believe in the human brain evolving over the course of several billion years. i also believe that since evolution granted us the power to think and therefore question things, and therefore see problems and therefore solve these problems we crated things to make up for our evolutionary problems. the reason other species live without technology is because they are ignorant to the fact that they have evolutionary disadvantages. the human ability to recognize these disadvantages is not unique, simply the most advanced and not just relying on instincts.

 

hope that helps. :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By definition, “evolution”, is classified as an alien to the natural order of creation.

Absurd! By WHO'S defintion? And what "order" is there to "creation" if you are pretending that "creation" can only mean the Christian mythical old guy snapping his fingers.

 

There is NOTHING more "natural" than evolution.

This may strongly suggest that creation came first. :evil:

Your lapse of reasoning skills is showing. There is nothing logical about asserting that something as perfectly natural as evolution, or the lack of it, supports some idiotic fairytale.

 

Even if evolution should be some overwhelmingly small chance be shown to be incorrect, that does not in any way "suggest" support for creationism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if evolution were true then there would be many creatures as intellegent as us.

ridiculous. Why is there a NEED for the evolution of intellegence? Simple minded anthropomorphic prejudice.

 

If anything, our development of intellect would reduce the potential of others developing it. We as a species filled the gap for such an animal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

''Even if evolution should be some overwhelmingly small chance be shown to be incorrect, that does not in any way "suggest" support for creationism''

 

nor does it in the least offer proof against creationism.

 

''If anything, our development of intellect would reduce the potential of others developing it. We as a species filled the gap for such an animal.''

 

this is a non-sequitur . is there only a small pool of intellect available ? i am unaware of these ''gaps'' available to be filled. could you explain ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is also prof of god.

Hahahaha, ya gotta love it. Lacking any CREDIBLE proof of their god, they grasp at what ever straw they find. Seen it at least three times on this thread alone. "If evolution isn't xyz, then god!"

notice also that is was the tree of knowledge that adam and eve ate of.

Oh which of the many directions just opened should I follow?

 

Notice what? From WHAT? Just because some story book has a fairy tale, it proves what?

 

assuming it actually happened, that there was a plant (tree) that was the first thing to provide the ability to "know", merely by eating it's fruit, that would mean that man did not possess the ability to KNOW before then. Thus how could he have KNOWN to NOT eat of it? Even if some cloud or lightening bolt proclaimed it to him earlier. He would not have the KNOWLEDGE of what was being communicated and what it meant.

 

This god of yours is such a monster that it you wreak infinite torture and pain on it's own creation because the creation did something it could not understand the consequences for? WOW!

after they ate they began to build.

You're obviously not Catholic. You know, the LARGEST group of Christinas. The Catholic Church teaches that they then started humping! Not building!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

''Even if evolution should be some overwhelmingly small chance be shown to be incorrect, that does not in any way "suggest" support for creationism''

 

nor does it in the least offer proof against creationism.

Ewe scared em a bit! Getting defensive! Please show us where I stated it did?

 

First off, until you can provide ANY valid proof FOR Creationism, there is no reason to allow it into the discussion. We don't need to waste time with unsupportable digressions.

 

''If anything, our development of intellect would reduce the potential of others developing it. We as a species filled the gap for such an animal.''

 

this is a non-sequitur . is there only a small pool of intellect available ? i am unaware of these ''gaps'' available to be filled. could you explain ?

I'll try to bring it to your level. We are the MOST intellegent creatures on earth that we know of. But NOT the ONLY. Other creatures use "tools". Other creatures show self awareness. We are talking about a relative scale, not an absolute or exclusivity.

 

Just as there is only ONE "fastest land animal". Does that mean WE are not FAST at all?

 

Just as there is only ONE "best xyz". Does that mean others are not xyz at all?

 

Yes there was/ is a "gap" for the fastest land creature. Right now it is filled, but earlier it was filled by a different creature. and at some alter time perhaps some other will replace the current one.

 

Right now "we", what we call homo sapien sapien, fills the most intellegent opening/ gap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...