Can you interrupt "Evolution"? With the right "selection pressure"?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is basically a test of whether something is real or not. Something that is real, can be interrupted. Gravity causes a fall, but the fall can be interrupted; electricity causes shock, but the shock can be interrupted. Most laws, if the are genuine, follow this simple pattern.

The question is "can you interrupt 'Evolution'?" - if so, how?

To my simple mind, Evolutionists would have to accept Evolution can be interrupted, if the selection pressures acting on Evolution, are the right selection pressures? So basically you could have a case, where something was pressured one way and then was pressured another way and it wouldn't be clear that Evolution was working. Like the butterfly, one minute its a caterpillar with certain selection pressures and then it becomes a butterfly, with different selection pressures again - what matters is that somehow Evolution can be interrupted, meaningfully.

The fact that the caterpillar has certain selection pressures, does not change the need to become a butterfly and the butterfly does not need to forget having caterpillar eggs, because the selection pressures on it, have changed.

Do you see what I am getting at here?

How do you know, when to interrupt Evolution? And when not?
What is the capacity to respond to selection pressures (adapted or evolved)?

 

[Shemjaza]

The act of a caterpillar becoming a butterfly isn't evolution, it's metamorphosis.

Evolution is about the species changing. So the general triggers of when a kind of butterfly changes, when they breed and what they eat could could be affected by evolution.

However, evolution can absolutely be stopped... by extinction. No life, no evolution.

 

[Occams Barber]

Hi there,

So this is basically a test of whether something is real or not. Something that is real, can be interrupted. Gravity causes a fall, but the fall can be interrupted; electricity causes shock, but the shock can be interrupted. Most laws, if the are genuine, follow this simple pattern.

The question is "can you interrupt 'Evolution'?" - if so, how?

To my simple mind, Evolutionists would have to accept Evolution can be interrupted, if the selection pressures acting on Evolution, are the right selection pressures? So basically you could have a case, where something was pressured one way and then was pressured another way and it wouldn't be clear that Evolution was working. Like the butterfly, one minute its a caterpillar with certain selection pressures and then it becomes a butterfly, with different selection pressures again - what matters is that somehow Evolution can be interrupted, meaningfully.

The fact that the caterpillar has certain selection pressures, does not change the need to become a butterfly and the butterfly does not need to forget having caterpillar eggs, because the selection pressures on it, have changed.

Do you see what I am getting at here?

How do you know, when to interrupt Evolution? And when not?
What is the capacity to respond to selection pressures (adapted or evolved)?

The only way to "interrupt" evolution is to prevent all life from procreating effectively terminating all life on Earth.

Good luck with that.

OB

 

[Gottservant]

However, evolution can absolutely be stopped... by extinction. No life, no evolution.

Then what starts it again?

Gravity with mass, begins to fall again. Electricity in an unbalancing of charge, as lightning, strikes Earth again.

What selection pressures are you talking about, that are specifically for extinction? That can't be counteracted??

 

[Gottservant]

The only way to "interrupt" evolution is to prevent all life from procreating effectively terminating all life on Earth.

Good luck with that.

OB

So what is the rate at which Evolution would be extincted, if there was such a selection pressure? Would it have to differ from what created mankind or not?

 

[Shemjaza]

Then what starts it again?

Gravity with mass, begins to fall again. Electricity in an unbalancing of charge, as lightning, strikes Earth again.

What selection pressures are you talking about, that are specifically for extinction? That can't be counteracted??

Personally I don't know how life starts. But evolution isn't it.

You need reproduction and inheritance for evolution to work. Without life, you don't have those things.

 

[Gottservant]

Personally I don't know how life starts. But evolution isn't it.

You need reproduction and inheritance for evolution to work. Without life, you don't have those things.

So Evolution is a subset of forces, that bring a specie to life,, when everything outside that life (and its subset of forces) has the right pressure?

 

[timewerx]

The question is "can you interrupt 'Evolution'?" - if so, how?

You could in some way.

You can breed desired traits like unquestioning obedience and loyalty...

That's how you turn a wolf into a dog.

And a man into a slave.

Of course, it's a lot more complicated to breed desired traits into a man. You need to take hold of the mass media, politics, money, big companies to be able to dicate "desirable" traits in the "ideal" wife or husband.

 

[Shemjaza]

So Evolution is a subset of forces, that bring a specie to life,, when everything outside that life (and its subset of forces) has the right pressure?

No. Evolution is process that happens to life.

It does not bring species to life. Species need to be alive and breeding for evolution to happen. If they stop being alive and breeding then so does evolution.

 

[Shemjaza]

You could in some way.

You can breed desired traits like unquestioning obedience and loyalty...

That's how you turn a wolf into a dog.

And a man into a slave.

Of course, it's a lot more complicated to breed desired traits into a man. You need to take hold of the mass media, politics, money, big companies to be able to dicate "desirable" traits in the "ideal" wife or husband.

That isn't stopping evolution, that's introducing new pressures or new environments.

Being cute, docile and helpful were advantageous traits to the populations of wolves who became the first dogs. Look around the world, wild wolves are almost extinct... but dogs have spread to every corner.

 

[Gottservant]

Personally I don't know how life starts. But evolution isn't it.

You need reproduction and inheritance for evolution to work. Without life, you don't have those things.

Yes, but what is it that starts or stops Evolution, if it is not life? Can the soul stop and start Evolution??

 

[Gottservant]

That isn't stopping evolution, that's introducing new pressures or new environments.

That's what I was thinking: surely new pressures are different from the "right" pressure?

Being cute, docile and helpful were advantageous traits to the populations of wolves who became the first dogs. Look around the world, wild wolves are almost extinct... but dogs have spread to every corner.

So has wolf Evolution, slowed down? Relative to dogs? Or other species??

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, but what is it that starts or stops Evolution, if it is not life? Can the soul stop and start Evolution??

Evolution is just a consequence of reproduction. It isn't a decision an individual makes.

I don't see any way that there being a soul or not effects evolution in any way.

That's what I was thinking: surely new pressures are different from the "right" pressure?

I'm not sure what a "right" pressure would be. Evolution can be affected by moral or immoral behavior of humans, but evolution is just the consequence, there isn't a right or wrong evolution.

So has wolf Evolution, slowed down? Relative to dogs? Or other species??

The wolf environment and niche are more stable then that of dogs... also they have fewer numbers, so there is less evolution going on.

Animals with extreme pressures tend to change rabidly to adapt... or go extinct.

If we are talking about domestic species, then the human owners are there to make sure they don't die out and the new traits are encouraged.

 

[Gottservant]

I'm not sure what a "right" pressure would be. Evolution can be affected by moral or immoral behavior of humans, but evolution is just the consequence, there isn't a right or wrong evolution.

Then you can evolve a moral? Or resistance to one??

The wolf environment and niche are more stable then that of dogs... also they have fewer numbers, so there is less evolution going on.

Ok, so if there is less evolution going on, and more is needed, then less is "wrong". Am I right?

Evolution is just a consequence of reproduction. It isn't a decision an individual makes.

I don't see any way that there being a soul or not effects evolution in any way.

Surely you can wait before reproducing, if you have not had a chance to compare your "mate" with other "mates". That would result in greater "cognitive" assonance, with desireable traits - a subjective Evolution, if you will.

The wolf environment and niche are more stable then that of dogs... also they have fewer numbers, so there is less evolution going on.

Isn't this why people work to stop species becoming instinct? What instinct is that - what word do you give that?

 

[SkyWriting]

What is the capacity to respond to selection pressures (adapted or evolved)?

One doesn't interrupt evolution. Some die from heat, some from cold, some from being eaten. You can interrupt a species by eliminating all it's habitat or whatever, but even extinction impacts other species. Evolution is change.

 

[Gottservant]

One doesn't interrupt evolution. Some die from heat, some from cold, some from being eaten. You can interrupt a species by eliminating all it's habitat or whatever, but even extinction impacts other species. Evolution is change.

I would rather make progress, than get a "moot point" (I understand that is a subjective expectation).

What about the instinct to save species - what is that? If I am responding to selection pressures on behalf of another species, that responding is not necessarily just "more" evolution (it is something in its own right?)?

 

[SkyWriting]

I would rather make progress, than get a "moot point" (I understand that is a subjective expectation).

What about the instinct to save species - what is that? If I am responding to selection pressures on behalf of another species, that responding is not necessarily just "more" evolution (it is something in its own right?)?

If you want to interfere and save a species.......good idea!
One less source of food and diversity is bad.

 

[Gottservant]

If you want to interfere and save a species.......good idea!
One less source of food and diversity is bad.

Yes, but what I am saying is that this is not co-equal with other Evolution.

It is something "outside" Evolution, acting in a way that affects "Evolution" (even in a slightly "Evolutionary way").

I like what you said "one less source of food and diversity is bad" but you are holding the umbrella over half the origin (and I can't understand why!)

 

[Shemjaza]

Then you can evolve a moral? Or resistance to one??

Maybe, but it doesn't make evolution moral or not.

Ok, so if there is less evolution going on, and more is needed, then less is "wrong". Am I right?

Not really. Some wolves live in the wilds, some wolves (dogs) live with humans and have changed according to the different pressures.

Wolves don't really need to adapt any fast to their environment... their problem is that their environment is shrinking.

Surely you can wait before reproducing, if you have not had a chance to compare your "mate" with other "mates". That would result in greater "cognitive" assonance, with desireable traits - a subjective Evolution, if you will.

Sort of. But evolution isn't what we use to describe the actions of individuals, even if they add up to evolution on a larger scale.

Isn't this why people work to stop species becoming instinct? What instinct is that - what word do you give that?

Protecting species is moral decision by humans, not an aspect of reality itself.

Over all genetic diversity of life has potential advantages... but it's also a way to protect something that we can't get back if we lose.

 

[SkyWriting]

Yes, but what I am saying is that this is not co-equal with other Evolution.

Human interference is natural or is not....a human judgment call.