Photosynthesis

[AnotherAtheist]

There was a lot of food back then. We have vast amounts of natural oil today because they did not use all their resources back then. How clever of evolution to know that we were going to need those reserves and to go to the trouble to store them for us.

We make use of animal manure as fertiliser. That doesn't mean that all those animals are going to the toilet for our benefit, doing it for us.

Same for plants that died hundreds of millions of years ago. The grew for their own survival, and anything left behind (oil/coal) is completely fortuitous for us.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

If we do not know how to try, then how can we claim that we know the mechanism of evolution?

This is like saying that if we don't know how to spontaneously combust by willpower alone, that we don't know how fire works.

And we do know how to perform "artificial evolution", because we can selectively breed animals to make new forms.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

It seems that so many creationists have that impression of evolution, that it works by simply thinking, "Today I'm going to evolve into a bird."

They'll never let go of their strawmen.

I personally believe that in the extreme cases that we're seeing here(*), that believing in such extreme strawmen is a defence mechanism. In that if they were to actually understand current models of evolution, that this would severely shake their faith as it's so much more reasonable an explanation of how we ended up with the current world than creationism. So to protect their core beliefs, they have to wilfully misunderstand evolution.

(*) in my experience only a small minority of creationists are this extreme.

 

[juvenissun]

This is like saying that if we don't know how to spontaneously combust by willpower alone, that we don't know how fire works.

And we do know how to perform "artificial evolution", because we can selectively breed animals to make new forms.

We do know how does evolution happen, don't we?

 

[Tiberius]

Any beach.

I thought you know evolution. You should understand what my answer means.

Fine.

You pick a beach, then tell me what niche is available that is currently not being exploited.

 

[Tiberius]

birds eat beach crabs all over the world. Does that mean the beach crab can not survive and keep evolving?

How do you know the fishes that tried to land in Cretaceous time did not have a similar capability?

That is not what niche means.

A niche in the context of evolution means a particular way of making a living. For example, moles and marsupial moles are both the "Burrow underground and eat things you find there" niche. And you'll never find places where both live together, because they are in direct competition.

Birds are not in the same niche as crabs. They are the predators of crabs.

 

[Tiberius]

If we do not know how to try, then how can we claim that we know the mechanism of evolution?

Oh, we know. What we are trying to teach you is that evolution is NOT the result of a conscious choice (Today I'm going to grow wings!) and it does NOT act on one individual.

 

[Split Rock]

If you analyzed the minor composition, it is obviously not true. (I am amazed you said this. You should know who are you talking to).

Minor composition? LOL. doesn't change the fact that our plasma is esentially sea water, with nutrients in it.

 

[juvenissun]

Minor composition? LOL. doesn't change the fact that our plasma is esentially sea water, with nutrients in it.

I don't know what you are talking about. Seawater has a sort of constant composition. We do not have that kind of composition. Do we have so much Cl or Na? I certainly hope you don't.

 

[juvenissun]

Fine.

You pick a beach, then tell me what niche is available that is currently not being exploited.

by what animal? I know there is no tiger along the Myrtle Beach. Should we try to put two there and see what would happen?

 

[juvenissun]

That is not what niche means.

A niche in the context of evolution means a particular way of making a living. For example, moles and marsupial moles are both the "Burrow underground and eat things you find there" niche. And you'll never find places where both live together, because they are in direct competition.

Birds are not in the same niche as crabs. They are the predators of crabs.

What about the crab? Is there a niche for them? Could they survive?

(I do think you have trouble to focus on the real issue. Your reply usually missed the point.)

 

[Tiberius]

by what animal? I know there is no tiger along the Myrtle Beach. Should we try to put two there and see what would happen?

Is there a niche available for a population of tigers? If so, what is it?

I am asking you if there is a method of making a living on the beach that is currently not being exploited. Are there fish living in the shallows? A animal can make a living by feeding on them. Are there crabs that burrow into the sand at low tide? An animal can make a living finding them for food. See what I mean?

What about the crab? Is there a niche for them? Could they survive?

(I do think you have trouble to focus on the real issue. Your reply usually missed the point.)

If the crabs are able to find food, then there is a niche for them. Just because some of the population may be eaten by predators doesn't mean that the population will be wiped out.

it seems that you need to learn that there is a big difference between "Having difficulty in living in an environment because predators kill some individuals" and "Having difficulty in an environment because an already established species eats the same food and is better at it, leaving none for anyone else."

 

[juvenissun]

Is there a niche available for a population of tigers? If so, what is it?

I am asking you if there is a method of making a living on the beach that is currently not being exploited. Are there fish living in the shallows? A animal can make a living by feeding on them. Are there crabs that burrow into the sand at low tide? An animal can make a living finding them for food. See what I mean?



If the crabs are able to find food, then there is a niche for them. Just because some of the population may be eaten by predators doesn't mean that the population will be wiped out.

it seems that you need to learn that there is a big difference between "Having difficulty in living in an environment because predators kill some individuals" and "Having difficulty in an environment because an already established species eats the same food and is better at it, leaving none for anyone else."

I believe that the crab was not living along the beach sometime ago. Somehow they showed up and survived. You tell me how did it happen? If not able, then you can at least tell me did it happen? Where was the niche for the first crab that made this attempt? To answer your question, the example of crabs that live on the beach today along with many other species IS an illustration that fish can do the similar at any time.

See the killer whale rushed onto the beach to catch a seal all the time? Why not the whale evolved onto the land by modifying its fin so it has a hand-like function?

 

[NailsII]

See the killer whale rushed onto the beach to catch a seal all the time? Why not the whale evolved onto the land by modifying its fin so it has a hand-like function?

I've never seen an orca beach itself to catch prey, but as I know that dolphins are masters at it then I will accept it as a distinct possibility.
Toothed whales (which includes their close relatives, the dolphins and killer whales) are superbly adapted to their aquatic environment, and as such would have no need to move back onto land.
As they are so large, orcas would have a real problem breathing on land due to their sheer body mass - lying on the beach, their lungs have to overcome the force of gravity pushing their bodies flat onto the ground.
With this in mind, I would imagine that in their current physical form (ie size) re-adapting to land is highly unlikely to say the least.

 

[variant]

birds eat beach crabs all over the world. Does that mean the beach crab can not survive and keep evolving?

Birds don't compete with beach crabs.

What your talking about is something competing with birds FOR beach crabs and needing to do so by evolving flight.

How do you know the fishes that tried to land in Cretaceous time did not have a similar capability?

Because we don't have massive amphibious land invasions in the cretaceous.

Again, the evidence gives us clues as to what happened, not what one thinks should have.

 

[variant]

What about the crab? Is there a niche for them? Could they survive?

You usually only find one species per specific niche. Competition doesn’t generally lead to armistice.

In the cretatious you are saying the more poorly evolved slightly amphibious fish would be able to outcompete hundreds of already amphibious ones for the same specialized nitches along the intertidal zone.

Common sense alone says this is unlikely.

So, what we see in the fossil record is that we don’t see the kind of major species invasion (which would show up) that we got in the devonian when there were new open nithces available.

 

[variant]

I believe that the crab was not living along the beach sometime ago. Somehow they showed up and survived. You tell me how did it happen?

Arthropods have a longer history of invadeing land. Having legs already probably helped when compared to fish.

See the killer whale rushed onto the beach to catch a seal all the time? Why not the whale evolved onto the land by modifying its fin so it has a hand-like function?

Who says it's not happening that way? I would find it hard to prove that a self beaching whale in search of prey is not going to evolve better land based ability.

 

[Tiberius]

I believe that the crab was not living along the beach sometime ago. Somehow they showed up and survived. You tell me how did it happen? If not able, then you can at least tell me did it happen? Where was the niche for the first crab that made this attempt? To answer your question, the example of crabs that live on the beach today along with many other species IS an illustration that fish can do the similar at any time.

How did it happen? Well, there are at least two ways I can think of.

First of all, it could be that when the crabs came out, they were able to exploit a niche that no other animal was exploiting.

A more likely option is that the crabs were adapted for another niche, but the adaptations they had also served them in good stead for living on the beach as well.

See the killer whale rushed onto the beach to catch a seal all the time? Why not the whale evolved onto the land by modifying its fin so it has a hand-like function?

Because such an adaptation would affect it's ability to live in the water. After all, the fin-hand adaptation could serve them well during the pup season, but what about the rest of the year? If they're hunting fish the rest of the year, a fin hand could well impede their hunting.

You don't seem to be looking at the big picture, Juve.

 

[juvenissun]

How did it happen? Well, there are at least two ways I can think of.

First of all, it could be that when the crabs came out, they were able to exploit a niche that no other animal was exploiting.

A more likely option is that the crabs were adapted for another niche, but the adaptations they had also served them in good stead for living on the beach as well.



Because such an adaptation would affect it's ability to live in the water. After all, the fin-hand adaptation could serve them well during the pup season, but what about the rest of the year? If they're hunting fish the rest of the year, a fin hand could well impede their hunting.

You don't seem to be looking at the big picture, Juve.

Why can't you make a similar argument for the fish to amphibian evolution in Jurassic time? What were the animals lived along the water/land contact? Why is there no room for an exploring fish? Fish can even find some rooms to explore today, such as the kill whale.

Well, you are not qualified to give any insight. Me neither. This empty logic argument is really meaningless. I suggest we quit.

 

[juvenissun]

You usually only find one species per specific niche. Competition doesn’t generally lead to armistice.

In the cretatious you are saying the more poorly evolved slightly amphibious fish would be able to outcompete hundreds of already amphibious ones for the same specialized nitches along the intertidal zone.

Common sense alone says this is unlikely.

So, what we see in the fossil record is that we don’t see the kind of major species invasion (which would show up) that we got in the devonian when there were new open nithces available.

If you look at a map of amphibian distribution during any period of time (even today), I bet you can find shoreline in many areas where there are no amphibians. Provided that it take an amphibian larger than the attempting fish with a good appetite to stop the fish. Can polar bears stop the evolution of the killer whale?