Target food proves evolution wrong

Click here for more information.

Here is a resource of links for those on this thread that often miss links

Against target food

Section A - The anteater

Ceibia Foundation - Tamandua

Anteaters spend a lot of time teaching their young how to live off this specialized diet.

Giant Anteater facts

It has poor vision but a keen sense of smell.

San Diego Zoo

The anteater will only feed at one mound for about a minute before moving on

Anteater at Animal Corner

They detect anthills and termite mounds with their acute sense of smell.

Section B - MISC

Coprophagia

Apes have been observed eating horse feces for the salt content.

AND OF COURSE

Young elephants, pandas, koalas, and hippos eat the feces of their mothers or other animals in the herd to obtain the bacteria required to properly digest vegetation found on the savanna and in the jungle.[4] When they are born, their intestines do not contain these bacteria (they are completely sterile). Without them, they would be unable to obtain any nutritional value from plants.

Plains Zebra -Wiki

Even with parental protection, up to 50% of zebra foals are taken by predation, disease, and starvation each year

USU EDU How animals learn what to eat

Young herbivores learn which foods are

Rock (geology) Wiki

Rocks are generally classified by mineral and chemical composition, by the texture of the constituent particles and by the processes that formed them.

Section C Evolution

Evolution - Wiki

Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.

This should cover the current topic. Feel free to build on this resource

Many posts claim the existence of target foods and state that it is an assumption. Properties of target foods are also posted. Let's compare the evidence.

Evidence for target foods:
Nothing.

Evidence against target foods:
1. No wikipedia article
2. No google search results
3. Wikipedia diet articles incomplete
www.fishtech.com...
www.maiaw.com...
www.theanimalspot.com...
www.factsaboutdeer.net...
4. Animals experiment with their eating
www.cogs.indiana.edu... ehaviour%20in%20pigeons.pdf
www.bbc.co.uk...
5. Widely spread species
elephants, white tail deer, moose
6. introduced species
gypsy moths, white moth, foxes, rabbits, nutria, rats
7. Filter feeders
en.wikipedia.org...
8. Opportunistic feeding
www.geology.ucdavis.edu...
www.mendeley.com...
academic.research.microsoft.com...
9. Lifecycle feeding changes
10. Evolution
11. Animals eating rocks and dirt
12. Homeostasis
13. Specialized senses in the mouth to test potential food
14. DNA

BTW Stereo it is not a HOAX its a SKUNK

Thank you for the correction. You are quite right. It is a SKUNK and not a hoax.

reply to post by colin42

I see no links, no supporting evidence as you were asked to supply. Do that.

My links would be any credible diet that you can come across.

I told you they PECK at anything until they learn what is and is not food.

I know YOU told me, I was looking for a credible source.

Nope, Nope, Nope. I asked for evidence as I have had a gut full of your opinion

So whats this, your opinion against my opinion.

Why would I explain your fallacy?

when you refuse to answer, it just tells me that I'm correct.

At last well done. Now answer why the tongue has these regions

Obviously for senseing different tastes.

Do you actually read the posts you reply too???????????????????

I have told you now at least 5 times that taste does not locate the food so are you now admitting you finally understand what I wrote in those posts?

Do you not read the posts????? Any and all senses would indicate that personal preference would choose the food, but there is still no personal differences to be found.

What poppycock. We see it every day. Please stop giving me your opinion as it is always wrong and more often than not completely wrong as above. Show your evidence

Then you should have no problem producing several diets that prove animals are experimental.

And by default it is no less significant. So why it is acceptable for you to spend page after page writing fallacy's about calcium but you refuse to accept salt as a valid on topic subject?

Again for the fifth time, because there is something major missing in our diets to supply that needed calcium. How many times do I have to say this?

You are obviously wrong because I have posted evidence that supports my statement above.

There is no evidence that EVERY animal teaches their offspring anything. Your wrong, and if you disagree, you should have no problem proving it, after all claiming that EVERY species is taught what they seem to instinctively know.

Nope. I supplied supporting evidence it is you that is making the assumption they don’t based on your opinion that flies in the face of observable and well documented evidence.

There is no evidence that every species is taught what they know, and if its true, then you should have no problem proving it.

You claimed we do not see this. A 2 sec search proves you wrong. Show your evidence that supports your latest claim.

Just because you found one shark that seems to have learned incorrectly, does not prove that ALL species diet through learning.

Nope. Only evidence is enough and the above is not that.

Then where is your proof that I'm wrong?

reply to post by colin42

We have already been through what you consider as being obvious does not constitute evidence.

Your claim was 'we rarely hear about animals dying of malnutrition.' My reply shows you are very wrong

Then you should have no problem producing pages of links if its really the epidemic you claim it to be.

Again. Where is the evidence that supports your claim? All I see is more wrong opinion.

Just because you find one or even a few links supporting your idea that all species are taught what to eat, is not proof that they all learn in this manner.

Who created your creator?

Evolution can be called a creator, who created evolution? I don't know.

WHOOPEE!! Yep the individuals decide what it likes to eat through teaching by its parents, availability and experimentation

And an entire species always likes the same food, sorry man I'm not buying your joke of an excuse.

reply to post by colin42

Ceiba Foundation - Tamandua

It appears to be a vary vague observation. There doesn't seem to be any proof that the parent is in fact teaching the baby how to hunt. More details would have been helpful. Either way, this is just one example, you should have no problem proving the entire animal kindom goes to school.

reply to post by Connector

you must have missed this question again:

tooth

One simple question. What is the target food of the common rat?

Wiki Rat

One of my best pets was a rat, I think they are very intelligent too. Its a good question. We obviously know what domesticated rats eat, as we are providing the food. In the wild rats have been known to be omnivores, rice grain, vegitables, and meat too. Insects, bugs, other rodents, dead carcasas. Their diet appears to be out of sorts, in otherwords they may not be in their target food. The also appear to be desperate eaters scavengers which is another sign that target food is missing. What its suppose to be, there is no way to tell. It could be that it has gone extinct or was missing upon being moved.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by stereologist

[quotes]Any and all senses used to determine what is food and what is not food would always require a prior knowledge beforehand, therefore intelligence. The sense are not the determining factor in deciding what is proper food as there would always be personal opinion choosing differently within a species group, which is not the case.

False. Numerous cases of animals experimenting with food from snails to deer to squirrels to abalone to chicks to filter feeders have been presented.

You are wrong again, they are just venturing out but staying in the same food group as they have lost their target food. There is no experimentation, they honestly believe they know that what they are eating to be correct food for themselves.

No. Elephants, deer, and all of the other examples show that no animals do that.

Then you should have no problem presenting a plehtora of links to support your fantasy.

Proved in the case of deer, squirrels, abalone, and anteaters. Case closed.

Your claim of proof is rejected, the abalone diet you offered appeard to include domesticated ones, as far as the rest, their diet is in black and white in wiki and I never saw anything that challenged it.

Everyone in this thread states that you are wrong and has produced evidence showing you are wrong. You too have produced evidence showing you are wrong.

It is a little odd that all the wikis are wrong and you are correct.

That is a simple inference based on the diets being incomplete for deer, squirrels, abalone, and anteaters.

Not that wiki is alway right but how do you know they are wrong?

You provide nothing more than a fantasy. Where is the first piece of evidence?

LIfe doesn't exist without balance.

reply to post by colin42

tooth. You cannot have looked very hard as there is even a word for it. Coprophagia

Do you think they would be doing this if target food was present?

Note it says they need to eat the feces of the mother or other animals to be able to obtain any nutritional value from plants. What is the diet listed for them? you got it, plants.

So they eat it and your target food is in it.

BTW Stereo it is not a HOAX its a SKUNK

Adaptation to enviroment is not proof against target food.

reply to post by stereologist

This is a logical fallacy called arguing from personal ignorance.

That personal ignorance came from the evolutionists.

rovide evidence for the existence of target foods.

Animals make no personal choice, they all eat what the rest of the species does.

The bible is not a trustable document.

And you know this how?

The bible is a bronze age fairy tale much of it borrowed from earlier tales. There are no witnesses.

I want to see proof that its a fairy tale.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Nothing of value was included in the entire post. Everything was based on a number of logical fallacies especially the fallacy of personal ignorance.

When the cycle of life is first created, all things must be in a balance, including the food cycle. It is impossible for a planet to survive out of balance, which is where ours is at this time. As a result we are looking at a collpase of 99% of all species as we know of. Balance is criticle to the understanding that target food is obviously real.

This is all a wild guess and unsupported by anything here in the rest of the thread.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Nothing in this post either other than more logical fallacy already posted and continued denial of the evidence against target foods already posted. Logical fallacies used include straw man arguments, fallacy of personal ignorance, and the fallacy of options.

What is needed is at least one piece of evidence that target foods are more than a fantasy, or conjecture, or a pipe dream. Where is the first piece of evidence in support of target foods?

reply to post by itsthetooth

Do you think they would be doing this if target food was present?

This is a logical fallacy called an appeal to incredulity. It may also involve an appeal to personal ignorance.

Read what coprophagia is about. There are important reasons for it.

reply to post by stereologist

Exodus, the flood, Genesis never happened. The bible is a bronze age fairy tale.

I want to see proof these never happned. I want to know how you single handedly disproved the bible as being real.

Read the thread for many examples of this being a falsehood.

Which is fine, but why are you avoiding the question.

False claims with no supporting evidence and you lied about the link.

Nope the link is real.

Not according tot he Presbyterians as I pointed out. When you decided to lie by quoting from the Presbyterian church you made a big mistake.

It is no lie, it is their work, how can it be a lie.

Arguing from personal ignorance and also telling falsehoods.

Your the one offering all the opinions with nothing to back them up.

A lie. I already supplied evidence of the incompleteness of the diet.

I allready said that domesticated diets don't count, you lie and your delusional.

Arguing from personal ignorance. I already provided the evidence.

The only thing you have proven is that you like to give your opinion without any proof.

Repeatedly proved wrong.

I see, your just unable to provide one example right?

Arguing from personal ignorance. You are also willfully misrepresenting.

Anything that creates over a billion species is obviously a creator.

reply to post by itsthetooth

That personal ignorance came from the evolutionists.

Are you now claiming that you did not write the post?

Animals make no personal choice, they all eat what the rest of the species does.

Already proven false.

The bible is a bronze age document. It is also replete with nonexistent events such as its 2 creationist myths, Noah's flood, and exodus. The evidence is overwhelmingly against all of these. Thus it is a fairy tale.

From the wikipedia

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[22] and most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".

en.wikipedia.org...

It's just a made up story, i.e. a bronze age fairy tale.

reply to post by stereologist

That was never your statement for many days. Now you are simply being a liar.

Its just another classic example of how evolutionitsts have to move the goal posts to be right. It's the only way your going to ever be right.

Your willful disregard of evidence against your position is obvious. Go back and read the thread.

I never found anything credible.

Arguing from personal ignorance.

Its just another glitch in the thory of evolution. If DNA can be changed by evolution then how do we know that our forensics and paternity tests are safe, its a valid question?

Sorry you did not understand the material posted. You'll just have to go back and read it again.

Ok I read it again, I'm still not seeing anything to support your claims.

Read the snail article for starters.

Again I found nothing that supports your claims.

Believing in inane issues does not make you open minded.

They are more than inane.

Thats your opinion speaking.

False.

Prove it.

Only if by meaningless you mean nothing specific.

No. It means the word was used without meaning.

Perhaps you would like to explain how a word has no meaning.

That is what you do. You close your mind to the evidence and replace it with delusional fantasies of what reality is all about. The issue has been proved in the thread. No reason to do it again

So I gather you will avoid gathering diets to prove me wrong as there is none.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Now thats a good observation, but is there anything that proves they actually eat everything they peck at, and then after trying it, make a decistion.

I told you they PECK at anything until they learn what is and is not food.

I know YOU told me, I was looking for a credible source.

And that is why you get everything wrong. There is a huge difference between 'eat everything' and peck at everything so you were looking for a credible source to a statement I never made.

Nope, Nope, Nope. I asked for evidence as I have had a gut full of your opinion

So whats this, your opinion against my opinion.

No it is ME asking YOU for evidence to support your opinions. Sheeesh!

Why would I explain your fallacy?

when you refuse to answer, it just tells me that I'm correct.

Yes. I know you make a lot of things up

Obviously for senseing different tastes.

Why those specific flavours?

Again for the fifth time, because there is something major missing in our diets to supply that needed calcium. How many times do I have to say this?

And this thread is about target food proving evolution wrong, not what is missing from the human diet in your opinion. An opinion that has been proven wrong countless times already.

There is no evidence that EVERY animal teaches their offspring anything.

There is overwhelming evidence and I have provided links that show examples and that includes the anteater. For you to deny what is has been placed in front of you shows your approach to this and every other subject you post on.

There is no evidence that every species is taught what they know, and if its true, then you should have no problem proving it.

You, anyone reading here and me knows what my statement was and you trying to twist the words into something I did not say again shows you in a very poor light indeed.

I told you animals learn what to and not to eat from their parents, availability in the environment and experimentation and yes, I had no trouble in proving it. See the links I provided.

You claimed we do not see this. A 2 sec search proves you wrong. Show your evidence that supports your latest claim.

Just because you found one shark that seems to have learned incorrectly, does not prove that ALL species diet through learning.

Your claim was:

If you were correct in your observation we would still see individuality in species, and we do not.

I did a 2 second search and gave you an example of a vegetarian shark that proves you wrong. Now instead of admitting you are wrong you dive headlong into denial. I see a familiar pattern here

Then where is your proof that I'm wrong?

How can I decide if you are wrong or correct if I do not see your evidence?

Your refusal or inability to show proof even when asked repeatedly on claims that fly in the face of the documented observations and evidence is to assume your claim is a baseless fantasy.

Where is your evidence?

reply to post by colin42

Coprophagia
Apes have been observed eating horse feces for the salt content

Oh come on now, wth, did they ask him?

Ceibia Foundation - Tamandua
Anteaters spend a lot of time teaching their young how to live off this specialized diet.


Giant Anteater facts
It has poor vision but a keen sense of smell.


San Diego Zoo
The anteater will only feed at one mound for about a minute before moving on


Anteater at Animal Corner
They detect anthills and termite mounds with their acute sense of smell.


Section B - MISC

Coprophagia
Apes have been observed eating horse feces for the salt content.
AND OF COURSE
Young elephants, pandas, koalas, and hippos eat the feces of their mothers or other animals in the herd to obtain the bacteria required to properly digest vegetation found on the savanna and in the jungle.[4] When they are born, their intestines do not contain these bacteria (they are completely sterile). Without them, they would be unable to obtain any nutritional value from plants.


Plains Zebra -Wiki
Even with parental protection, up to 50% of zebra foals are taken by predation, disease, and starvation each year


USU EDU How animals learn what to eat
Young herbivores learn which foods are


Rock (geology) Wiki
Rocks are generally classified by mineral and chemical composition, by the texture of the constituent particles and by the processes that formed them.


Section C Evolution

Evolution - Wiki
Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.


This should cover the current topic. Feel free to build on this resource

The rest of your claims are bogus, they do nothing to prove your point.