A nail in the evolution coffin: plants first or animals?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by PieKeeper
 


In fact the majority of flowering plants do - grasses and most trees are wind-pollinated. Most of the plants commonly pollinated by insects are also capable of self-pollination. That is, they can breed with themselves, within the same flower. There are of course exceptions to that (fruit trees generally require insects, for instance) but for the most part, plants would go just fine without pollinating bugs.

So why evolve towards that direction? Because insect delivery is more efficient. A wind-blown breeder has a perfectly random chance of passing its genes on through pollen. Insect-born pollen is delivered much more certainly. Those plants whose flowers attracted insects thus simply had a higher rate of reproduction, and the insect-attracting genes were the ones to spread. Plants that delivered the most pollen to the most insects and did so in an efficient manner - such as those plants that react to the bee by whacking it in the head with a wad of pollen - would also have hteir genes spread better.

As for whether plants or animals evolved first... Depends on where you start counting them as "plants" and "animals"




posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Lannock
 


You could also ask the evolutionists if they know if the male monkey and female monkey crawled out of the water at the same beach in Africa at approximately the same time. And figured out that they belong together.

Or if any of the male monkeys managed to produce a offspring without a female within its short life span.

And you can ask them why has evolution suddenly stopped. We dont see things crawling out of the water anymore. Actually we have never seen any of the things scientists preach about evolution.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 



You could also ask the evolutionists if they know if the male monkey and female monkey crawled out of the water at the same beach in Africa at approximately the same time. And figured out that they belong together.


Seeing as how Evolutionary Theory does not postulate anything of the sort, wouldn't that question seem a little retarded and unfounded?


Or if any of the male monkeys managed to produce a offspring without a female within its short life span.


Given your above question, define short life span. Would these primal monkeys have a life span of two hours or would they consist of the more normal life span of today's monkeys in which there is ample time to reproduce?



And you can ask them why has evolution suddenly stopped. We dont see things crawling out of the water anymore. Actually we have never seen any of the things scientists preach about evolution.


Evolution has not stopped, I would more accurately say you don't keep up with current news and discoveries. While I could hand over a hundred links showing current evolutionary evidences and observations, I do not personally think you would learn anything. I will leave it upon yourself to look up the pertinent information and discover for yourself that you are either knowledgeable in what your arguing or just to full of pride to accept the instances of evolution shown.



posted on Nov, 2 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
From Wikipedia
“Some plants, such as root vegetables and salad crops, will produce a useful food crop without pollination when grown from seed but may require insect pollination to produce seeds for the next generation”.

The plants grow by seed but for the next generation they need to be pollinated to grow seed. So bees pollinating plants is evolution (not “De-evolution” as you call it).
Bees kept the crop growing whereas those grown by seed could not produce seed every season (each crop reached it’s limit of producing seed) because there was a waiting time for the young crops to grow and produce seed.
Bees were a better way.

And according to the Bible plants (grass, Herbs, and fruit trees) came before land animals and mankind (Read Genesis 1:11-12).
Evolution is a slow process making a species a little better one step at a time and things go from simple to more complex.



posted on Nov, 2 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Lannock
 


This is what I want to respond to, the title and possible intent,
not necessarily the content, which seems secondary:

"A nail in the evolution coffin"

Some people think that 'evolution' is an attack on God;
now I can't imagine why anyone would think that. As
a result, all these people 'attack evolution'. That really
makes me shake my head. Some of the brightest minds
in human history were deists; which means the belief
that God made the universe, then set it ticking /evolving,
among other facets of that belief system.

A related concept that intelligent designers use is,
'irreducible complexity'. They are in effect saying
that their God is too weak to create a system which
can evolve complex systems, and that He has to
interfere with his own design to get it to work at
all. This really makes me shake my head.

Some folks like to attack dinosaur bones..in fact
a common saying about them, is that "God created
dinosaur bones and planted them in the Earth,
in order to test men's faith". Well no God that
I might worship would be that deceitful.. That
really makes me shake my head.

Now the point here is not whether God exists
or not.. but the ARGUMENTS levied against
science by some of God's worshippers really
make me shake my head.. makes me wonder
what's going on, or not going on in those
worshippers heads, and why they wish to
create a concept about God that makes
God look like a feeble old fool. I just
don't get it.

(I'm not saying anything about the OP..
probably just wanted to stir the pot and
get a good conversation going.. I've
been known to do that once or twice).

KPB



posted on Nov, 2 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
If you check from here, you can see that based on mtDNA, plants split and diversified from the eukaryote lineage long before e.g. animals and fungi split apart.



posted on Nov, 3 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   
It's posts like the OP or the one below which make me shake my head in disbelief. How can anyone who has had access to a decent education and lived in a modern, Western society still have trouble with what is fundamentally such a simple thing.

The irony of all this is that, if taking the time to learn and understand, Evolutionary theory is quite easy to grasp and makes sense with all the evidence we have, but some people will willingly not bother to learn properly but will throw their lot in with "God did it" with no evidence at all...


spy66
You could also ask the evolutionists if they know if the male monkey and female monkey crawled out of the water at the same beach in Africa at approximately the same time. And figured out that they belong together.


Why on earth would anyone even ask such a ridiculous question, much less try to explain it. Where, in evolutionary theory, does it say monkeys crawled out of any water? Do you honestly think that a fully formed monkey just "appeared" on the beach?


spy66
Or if any of the male monkeys managed to produce a offspring without a female within its short life span.


Oh dear lord.... I bet in your mind you have this idea of evolution producing an entirely new species direct from another....


spy66
And you can ask them why has evolution suddenly stopped. We dont see things crawling out of the water anymore. Actually we have never seen any of the things scientists preach about evolution.


Evolution hasn't stopped, it just happens far to slowly to pay much attention to, usually. A good example of evolution in action that you can observe is Virus' and Bacteria, as they reproduce many times an hour so you can actually see it happen. How do you think bacteria etc gain resistance to anti-biotics? Because the ones that had no resistance were killed off and the few who, through a quirk in genetics, had developed a mutation that gave them resistance and subsequently thrived in their environment



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
1.Life began in the oceans, where animal and plant like organisms evolved.

2.Fungus like organisms, and bacteria first touched land, and animal life followed.

3.The soil got fertilized with the decay of life.

4.The first plants will be able to evolve on land.

This is the most basic explanation I could think of. Plants could only have been tossed in the mix, after the soil of the Earth was transferred to a nutritious combination of minerals and decaying matter.





top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join