Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Your question brings up a question that has always puzzled me in regard to evolution from origin. I don't know how cells or organisms grow or function, but how does any living life form survive its particular infancy stage, one of some duration period anyway, without a matured parent?
bacteria do it all the time - actually pretty much any single-celled life form does it. Quite a few multi-celled organisms do this without quip too - trees, plants, turtles...
I get that, not in a knowledgeable scientific way of course, but how would any infant stage life form that remotely resembles a human survive?
Not sure what you're asking - a turtle is an example of a quite advanced tetrapod that is self-sufficient from the outset - are you asking how we did it? If so, then we didn't. Our lineage of parenting extends well back before we diverged to become humans.
At some point on the evolution time-scale eventual humans had to make an initial step to human-like form, two arms and legs etc. How did the first one survive without being given adult care?
Well, its parents would've looked after it. we as first humans would've been a very gradual and imperceptible shift from what we were before it, just as every other form of life was cared for (or came about fully independent and self-caring) from its parents
Just from a common sense perspective there would have to be a "first" caring parent, one that could help an infant survive. Here we are supposedly millions of years later and an infant can't survive on its own. That seems more like regression than evolution. I just can't see the first transitional phases to human-like form, which requires an infancy period, in a world that would have eliminated it pretty quickly.
Well, it depends on the conditions that led to caring parents. Certain environments (particularly ones favouring herds or groups) will be more conducive to parental care,thereby selecting the organisms that are better able to care and protect their relatively few young over those that don't. This is again dependent on the environment, such as groups of upright walking apes on the plains of sub-saharan africa tend to suit parental care than say a green leatherback turtle having to hang around a particular beach to care for its many, many offspring.
perhaps you keep missing it - the parental care was in place well before the first human. In fact, if you really want to get the gist, here's some results of babies with the clutch reflex to hang onto their hairy parents that we're all still born with, despite humans no longer being so hairy these days...
There's also never going to be a real jump in requirements from mother to child.
Again, their Parents looked after them! Cared parenting extends all the way back to our fishy ancestors - before land animals were even a thing. Remember though, all forms of parenting (or lack thereof) can be found at pretty much any ecosystem you can imagine. this is just how evolution does things. What form of animal do you know of that doesn't look after their infants to some degree?
Well, evidence is just evidence and there's simply no argument about it, let alone a continuing one. Populations evolve, not individuals - so when you talk about the first human, or first chimp, there was never such a thing. Instead, a population of animals speciated and evolved over a long period of time to become a population of chimps or human.
