It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Evolution is so smart, then why hasn't it come up with the wheel?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
Evolution as I understand it is same as selective breeding. The difference is that one is done by humans, and the other one natural by nature.

Different dog species are the result of human selectively breeding wolfs.
I guess evolution is equavalent to mother nature selectively breeding animals or species.




posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Something that has always bugged me...how did random evolutionary mutation know that leaves were above the . of the giraffe? Think about it...it fits like a glove to such an extent that, while not perfect, many things don't look to be formed by a blind apparatus of change (evolution). The giraffes predecessor might have seen them, but surely seeing a food source does not trigger mutation. In other words, a source of water could be placed ten feet above all dogs and other sources be made scarce, but that wouldn't result in dogs equipped to get the high source of water 50,000,000 years from now...just a lot of dead dogs. To admit such a thing is to admit a much "smarter" apparatus of change that is intensely aware and is also aware OUTSIDE of an observing creature!

Call this silly if you will, but I have seen similar questions get scoffed at and glossed over...
edit on 21-2-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   

How did random evolutionary mutation know that leaves were above the . of the giraffe?

It didn't. You might say natural selection did, but even that is only metaphorically correct.

You may have noticed that some people have long necks and others have shorter ones. Giraffes, or their ancestors, were no different. In an environment where tasty foliage grew high up off the ground, or in which short-necked but more efficient competitor species devoured everything that grew lower down, the longer-necked giraffes were able to eat more easily and more often than the short-necked ones. They got more nourishment and had more long-necked babies. Meanwhile the short-necked giraffes starved to death before they could have any short-necked babies. Today, the world is full of long-necked giraffes.

That's the answer – the official and correct answer according to the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Mutation is random, but evolution is not. Natural selection picks winners and weeds out losers. That's not random.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 

On that note, if God made us, why didn't he make us with wheels instead of legs...answer, because he didn't make us, because he doesn't exist.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by pirhanna
I mean really, all those anti-creationist people think evolution is so great and explains everything, then why hasn't it come up with the wheel?

gotcha!!



There's nothing that smart about the wheel, it's the axle that's clever and that requires to much separation for nature.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:59 AM
link   

. They got more nourishment and had more long-necked babies. Meanwhile the short-necked giraffes starved to death before they could have any short-necked babies. Today, the world is full of long-necked giraffes


I am not aware of any short necked Giraffe skeletons being found? I know it's a little off topic, but if there is evidence of this can you educate me/ show me where?



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Slipdig1
 


Here is a current "relative" of the Giraffe with a short neck.

upload.wikimedia.org...



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by saabacura
Evolution as I understand it is same as selective breeding. The difference is that one is done by humans, and the other one natural by nature.

Different dog species are the result of human selectively breeding wolfs.
I guess evolution is equavalent to mother nature selectively breeding animals or species.


Well, you're at least part of the way there.

What you're actually discussing is the difference between artificial and natural selection. There are other forms of selection as well, such as sexual selection. If any of these forms of selection cause a change in allele frequency within a population, then it's evolution, regardless of which form of selection was responsible.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Slipdig1
 

No, I don't know whether any short-necked giraffe skeletons have been unearthed. Probably not.

The official explanation for the evolution of giraffe necks need not be the right one. No-one is actually claiming it is; it's just an illustration of how natural selection works. It could have worked other ways: maybe giraffes find other giraffes with long necks sexy. That would have the same effect as a competition for high-growing fodder, except it could make it happen much faster.

The reality of evolution by natural selection does not depend on an explanation of the length of giraffes' necks. If you don't believe in evolution, that's fine by me. You can disbelieve in Chicken McNuggets too, if you like. But if you are genuinely seeking knowledge on the subject of giraffes' necks and evolution, you might find this page interesting. Enjoy!


edit on 21/2/11 by Astyanax because: a neck stuck out.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


It could also be that longer necks are better for neck fighting.





posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   


The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again. In one Age, called the Third Age by some, an Age yet to come, an Age long past, a wind rose in the Mountains of Mist. The wind was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings nor endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But it was a beginning.

From the "Wheel of Time" epic fantasy novel series by Robert Jordan

Great wisdom can be found within that series, as well as "The Sword of Truth" epic fantasy novel series by Terry Goodkind. But I believe in a wheel of time and succession of ages. So, in other words, life itself is a wheel.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by LifeInDeath
 

How would you cope with blood circulation? You'd need to manage inflow to and outflow from the rotating wheel. Hard to do without getting your pipes twisted.

I imagine the wheels to be made of some sort of substance similar to finger nails in the sense that it is essentially hardened, dead cells or maybe a secreted substance that then hardens. You could have an organ or a process that keeps secreting the substance so that as the wheels wear down, they can be renewed/built up again. Or, maybe the creature ingests a particular food, then regurgitates some undigested waste material, but uses this substance to build up the wheels. It would be odd, but not impossible, IMO.

In "The Subtle Knife," the second novel of the "His Dark Materials" fantasy series by Phillip Pullman, he came up with an intelligent species in an alternate universe version of Earth that would use a very hard coconut-like wheel-shaped seedpod from a particular kind of tree, which it had evolved to use as wheels. They lived in a kind of symbiosis with the trees that produced these seeds, used them as wheels for a time until they wore out, then deposited them very far from the original location of their parent trees. They were a very weird kind of creature, but there was a logic to it. (The novels are half-way between fantasy and science fiction, in a lot of ways.)
edit on 2/21/2011 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by LifeInDeath
 

Yes, I've read The Subtle Knife. Those 'wheel nuts' sound a bit far-fetched even for natural selection, though.

As for the keratinous-secretion idea, there may be a few practical problems. Shaping the secretion into the form of a wheel might be difficult without a supporting armature of some kind. Also, the secretion would need to have contradictory properties in order to act as a lubricant (low viscosity and fluid friction) as well as a structural material (solid, light, durable). But the most difficult part of all would be delivering power to such a wheel. How would you go about doing that?



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 





posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Because evolution is a scientific process, not a living creature... But it was because of evolution that an animal evolved to the point in which it was able to make a wheel.


Though really, I believe in a sort of evolution/creationist combo... Sort of... It is God/nature/universes plan for everything to evolve... If that makes sense.

But I digress.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


It created us and we came up for the wheel - the wheel would not exist if it did not create us therefore I think it is a fair call to say nature also created the wheel - just not directly.
There is an article here that seeks to prove Nature invented the wheel
edit on 22-2-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 

That was an interesting and enlightening article.

As a child growing up in the Australian bush, a native friend taught me to move "Abo way", as he called it.
The Aboriginal way of running and walking, (sadly, forgotten by most Aborigines today,) is much more fluid and relaxed than normal "white" locomotion. - Years later, learning dancing, the first lessons involved teaching the students to walk properly, so they could gracefully manage the long, graceful strides of the waltz. The teacher was surprised to find my daughter and I already walked that way.

Walking native style means being able to walk forever without tiring, as you relax completely and just let your legs swing like pendulums from the hip-bones, taking long, swinging, effortless strides. This style of walking does use the legs like wheels.

Running native style also doesn't take much effort. I was taught to think I was a kangaroo. When running, each step was a powerful leap, but done with a feeling of relaxed effortlessness. Instead of working at speed, you use your legs as springs, and let them do the work for you. With the wind at your back you feel you're flying, and barely touch the ground. As the article says, the legs here are the most simplified wheels, each consisting of a single spoke and thus able to achieve some height advantage, resulting in increased speed.

Replacing legs with wheels, well just ask the cripple in a wheelchair how much he's enjoying the advantage. Wheels are much slower over rough terrain. You can't jump on wheels. A wheeled creature could not lie down to rest. A wheeled creature could not climb trees or swim or squeeze through narrow cave openings.

NASA agrees:

6-Legged Mars Walker Explorer Robot
Although mathematical analysis has shown that a legged micro-rover is more terrain-capable than its larger wheeled counterpart, the next step is to provide a testing environment for a legged vehicle. This will first be done through available modeling software with simulated Mars terrain. Additionally, it is the intention of the design team to construct a legged vehicle and Mars terrain facility for the physical testing of legged locomotion in simulated Martian conditions.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


Obvious troll is obvious



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Saturn has a wheel around it, it is not alive either but does not mean shapes have to conform to life, you could say randomness since creation has made every shape so far, fine you know that is down to laws of probability in evolution sense but as for creationism it is more than that, it is part of God's design and the way to only compare the two is how God thinks in numbers and numerology of the Bible compared to nature.

Example 7 is a Godly number in the Bible as is 3

7 we have 7 pure colours of nature
7 we have 7 pure notes in music for example.

7 are used and can be divided on how many times certain words and names have been mentioned and the list goes on so there is clues of God's nature and creation it.

They have recently discovered the Pyramids have hidden ratios and numbers relating to the earth size and where they are placed on comparison to earths mass because back then there were lots of secrets that today we don't know about and no doubt the Bible holds some too.

Maybe those same deniers of the Bible be it individual or government don't want you to find out, yes some creationists can lack some arguments but so can the atheists who just go so deep when the Bible is concerned, I meant if they took the same attitude about the Pyramids at Giza of just being well made man made ancient objects and forgot the calculations we would have missed what was truly behind its mystery and maybe the Bible has more of a mystery to tell, we all like to find out and go deeper.

The next level is not disproving the Bible but going deeper down the fabric of it on a mathematical scale.

Job 26:7 (NKJV)
7 He stretches out the north over empty space;
He hangs the earth on nothing.

When was the Book of Job written, a very long time ago?

Isaiah 40:22 (NKJV)
22 It is He, who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Genesis 22:17 (NKJV)
17 blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore

(Today scientists say there are as many stars as there is sand on earth and yet for many thousands of years people could not prove the earth was round like a circle, the Bible did.)

Creationists or not I still think the Bible should be read or made comparable with today’s modern living, be is historical manuscripts and ancient places and people, geography, morality of human nature, prophecy and the future, challenging science and faith itself and also language teaching and culture.

Today it is painted as nonsense and that is a sad thing because people will know less and less of its importance and contributions.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
If god is so smart why didn't he come up with the wheel?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join