How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth

  • 653 Replies
  • 163998 Views
*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #570 on: November 02, 2010, 11:41:20 PM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?

*

ClockTower

  • 6455
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #571 on: November 02, 2010, 11:47:12 PM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?
Your first two points have nothing to do with BiJane's post. However, you're right at both ends of your post.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #572 on: November 03, 2010, 12:05:32 AM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?
Your first two points have nothing to do with BiJane's post. However, you're right at both ends of your post.

Your failure to comprehend simple sentences has nothing to do with me.

*

ClockTower

  • 6455
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #573 on: November 03, 2010, 12:11:11 AM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?
Your first two points have nothing to do with BiJane's post. However, you're right at both ends of your post.

Your failure to comprehend simple sentences has nothing to do with me.
Your failure to understand BiJane's excellent point has everything to do with you. BiJane, you surely did a great job reminding us of the basics of evolution. Thanks.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #574 on: November 03, 2010, 12:58:40 AM »
My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.
You are absolutely right. The bird which takes the first path has better chances for survival. Which one of the Arctic terns would survive its migration. The one who takes the straight(shortest) path or the one who doesn't?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8451908.stm
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

ClockTower

  • 6455
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #575 on: November 03, 2010, 01:14:49 AM »
My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.
You are absolutely right. The bird which takes the first path has better chances for survival. Which one of the Arctic terns would survive its migration. The one who takes the straight(shortest) path or the one who doesn't?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8451908.stm
Two birds with one stone. Awesome job, zork!
1) Debunking the lame understanding of EG
2) Providing evidence of the Coriolis Effect:
Quote
"They make a detour of several thousand km but once we start comparing the route to the prevailing wind system, it makes perfect sense - moving in a counter-clockwise direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere.
"It's just more energy-efficient for them to do that even though they are travelling several thousand more km than if they flew in a straight line."
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Hessy

  • 1184
  • +0/-0
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #576 on: November 03, 2010, 04:06:25 AM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?

You got the point that, even though birds go from "poit A to B to C to D etc...", they're only going an extra .1-1% longer distance by flying at higher altitutes than ground level.  So in reality, the OP is very wrong to think that evolution/natural selection would've killed off birds by not seeking the "most efficient path".

And they may also be flying at altitudes for a handful of other reasons, as I've stated at least 3 times in this thread.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #577 on: November 03, 2010, 08:22:40 AM »
My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.
You are absolutely right. The bird which takes the first path has better chances for survival. Which one of the Arctic terns would survive its migration. The one who takes the straight(shortest) path or the one who doesn't?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8451908.stm
Two birds with one stone. Awesome job, zork!
1) Debunking the lame understanding of EG
2) Providing evidence of the Coriolis Effect:
Quote
"They make a detour of several thousand km but once we start comparing the route to the prevailing wind system, it makes perfect sense - moving in a counter-clockwise direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere.
"It's just more energy-efficient for them to do that even though they are travelling several thousand more km than if they flew in a straight line."

Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #578 on: November 03, 2010, 11:04:47 AM »
Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way. And as you defend the OP then I never proved you right because your and OPs opinion is that the birds fly the shortest path(not easier path or not the path with better survival chances) which I never proved.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #579 on: November 03, 2010, 11:15:45 AM »
Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way.

If survival entails making every situation as easy as possible, then evolution is evidently about making things easier.

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #580 on: November 03, 2010, 11:31:38 AM »
Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way.

If survival entails making every situation as easy as possible, then evolution is evidently about making things easier.
Survival won't entail making every situation as easy as possible. For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy. And in the same time the easiest ways sometimes are better from the standpoint of the survival. Like the migration paths. Is it really so hard to understand?
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
  • +1/-1
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #581 on: November 03, 2010, 11:36:56 AM »
Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way.

If survival entails making every situation as easy as possible, then evolution is evidently about making things easier.

There are two paths in front of you: a long path, with walls, or a shorter, with fields either side and wild animals roaming. Which will allow you the best chance to survive?
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #582 on: November 03, 2010, 11:49:44 AM »
This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

My mistake. I didn't realize that a bird that goes from point A to B to C to D to E to F to G to H to I to J to K to L has a better chance of survival than one that figured out to go directly from point A to L instead.

I didn't realize that predators don't actually go after the easy prey, but in reality go for the toughest.

I have been thinking this wrong the whole time haven't I?

The path of least resistance is not always the shortest path.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #583 on: November 03, 2010, 12:04:35 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.

This is non sequitur. You personally surviving and you trying to find a mate are two different things.

Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way.

If survival entails making every situation as easy as possible, then evolution is evidently about making things easier.

There are two paths in front of you: a long path, with walls, or a shorter, with fields either side and wild animals roaming. Which will allow you the best chance to survive?

There are too many variables you haven't listed. How long is the long path? How short is the short path? What sort of wild animals are they? What supplies do I have for my travels? Do I have to be there in a certain amount of time?

For all I know the long path could be a lightyear long and the the short path could be only 100 yards and the wild animals are rabbits. I could have no supplies, in which case the shorter and easier path would be best for my survival.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 01:53:37 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
  • +1/-1
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #584 on: November 03, 2010, 12:15:37 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.

This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.

Epic failure. You just proved BiJane wrong. The birds fly that way because it is the most energy efficient, and therefore easiest way to do it. Thank you for proving me right Clocktower and zork. You guys are pals.
  Where did you got that I proved BiJane wrong? She just stated that - evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
But survival doesn't mean that the path the birds take can't be easier to fly. As the easier way assures the more chances for survival then it's just logical that birds fly that way.

If survival entails making every situation as easy as possible, then evolution is evidently about making things easier.

There are two paths in front of you: a long path, with walls, or a shorter, with fields either side and wild animals roaming. Which will allow you the best chance to survive?

There are too many variables you haven't listed. How long is the long path? How short is the short path? What sort of wild animals are they? What supplies do I have for my travels? Do I have to be there in a certain amount of time?

For all I know the long path could be a lightyear long and the the short path could be only 100 yards and the wild animals are rabbits. I could have no supplies, in which case the shorter and easier path would be best for my survival.

Are you capable of individual thought?

Okay, fine, details: short path. Say, two miles long, some in the water where there are piranhas, some on land with savage cannibals. The long path is two and a half/three miles long, protected from animals and attackers. You have no supplies, but on both roots it's possible to stop and pick up food and water.
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #585 on: November 03, 2010, 12:39:01 PM »
Are you capable of individual thought?

Okay, fine, details: short path. Say, two miles long, some in the water where there are piranhas, some on land with savage cannibals. The long path is two and a half/three miles long, protected from animals and attackers. You have no supplies, but on both roots it's possible to stop and pick up food and water.

Well gosh, that is easy. Piranhas only bite creatures that scare them, and even then there are no recorded deaths caused by piranha. So I'll just swim in slow, deliberate movements so that I glide through the water and not make a ruckus. When I get out of the water I'll strip all of my clothes off, and then smother some cherries from a nearby bush on myself so it looks as though I too, am a savage cannibal. I shall then proceed to run though the land screaming strings of sounds and syllables that don't even make sense, again, to blend in. I'll make it faster on the short path than on the longer path. Upon reaching my destination, this act of extreme survival prowess will undoubtedly impress all of the fertile women at the village I am heading towards. This will allow me to more easily spread my loin, and wage war upon the other kingdoms.

Or I could just reply that since the longer path is only 25-50% longer, it is far easier to take that path than deal with the wildlife/natives.

You still lose. :)
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 12:48:44 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
  • +1/-1
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #586 on: November 03, 2010, 12:42:56 PM »
Are you capable of individual thought?

Okay, fine, details: short path. Say, two miles long, some in the water where there are piranhas, some on land with savage cannibals. The long path is two and a half/three miles long, protected from animals and attackers. You have no supplies, but on both roots it's possible to stop and pick up food and water.

Well gosh, that is easy. Piranhas only bite creatures that scare them, and even then there are no recorded deaths caused by piranha. So I'll just swim in slow, deliberate movements so that I glide through the water and not make a ruckus. When I get out of the water I'll strip all of my clothes off, and then smother some cherries from a nearby bush on myself so it looks as though I too, am a savage cannibal. I shall then proceed to run though the land screaming strings of sounds and syllables that don't even make sense, again, to blend in. I'll make it faster on the short path than on the longer path. Upon reaching my destination, this act of extreme survival prowess will undoubtedly impress all of the fertile women at the village I am heading towards. This will allow me to more easily spread my loin, and wage war upon the other kingdoms.

Or I could just reply that since the longer path is only 25-50% longer, it is far easier to take that path than deal with the wildlife/natives.

You still lose. :)

One mile is about ten or so minutes. Slow, careful swimming and a very risky berry move, right.
also:

This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 12:52:04 PM by BiJane »
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #587 on: November 03, 2010, 12:47:57 PM »
I also addressed how the long path would be easier in that post. So you lose. Sorry!  8)

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
  • +1/-1
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #588 on: November 03, 2010, 12:52:37 PM »
I also addressed how the long path would be easier in that post. So you lose. Sorry!  8)

This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #589 on: November 03, 2010, 12:58:58 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.

This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.

The survival (propagation) of the species instinct is sometimes stronger than the survival of the individual instinct.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Thork

Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #590 on: November 03, 2010, 01:39:54 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.

This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.

The survival (propagation) of the species instinct is sometimes stronger than the survival of the individual instinct.
And sometimes of course it isn't.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/071114-eating-young.html

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #591 on: November 03, 2010, 01:52:23 PM »
I also addressed how the long path would be easier in that post. So you lose. Sorry!  8)

This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

And I proved your statement wrong. Just because you make the text bigger doesn't make it correct.


?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #592 on: November 03, 2010, 01:52:57 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.
This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

And sometimes of course it isn't.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/071114-eating-young.html
If you only bothered to read it then you would have seen that you just failed with your argument.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
  • +1/-1
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #593 on: November 03, 2010, 01:54:13 PM »
I also addressed how the long path would be easier in that post. So you lose. Sorry!  8)

This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

And I proved your statement wrong. Just because you make the text bigger doesn't make it correct.



You addressed how it would be easier, I said it wasn't for ease. In what book am I the one who was proven wrong? Just because you think it's easier to go through incredibly risking water and take a huge risk in disguise doesn't mean you have a better chance at survival than a person who takes the safe route.
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #594 on: November 03, 2010, 01:55:43 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.
This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

I disagree. It is a benefit of the survival process. Animals that are sterile survive just fine without reproducing.

I also addressed how the long path would be easier in that post. So you lose. Sorry!  8)

This has probably been said a lot before, but oh well: evolution isn't for ease, it's for survival.

And I proved your statement wrong. Just because you make the text bigger doesn't make it correct.



You addressed how it would be easier, I said it wasn't for ease. In what book am I the one who was proven wrong? Just because you think it's easier to go through incredibly risking water and take a huge risk in disguise doesn't mean you have a better chance at survival than a person who takes the safe route.

Not at all, I was showing how it is possible with that example. If you actually read people's entire posts, you'd notice how I pointed out that in this case, this distance difference is so minute that it is easier to just take the longer route.

We have two valid counter-examples against your claim that it isn't about ease. You are clearly wrong.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 01:58:47 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

berny_74

  • 1785
  • +0/-0
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #595 on: November 03, 2010, 01:59:39 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.
This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

I disagree. It is a benefit of the survival process. Animals that are sterile survive just fine without reproducing.

How does the effect of spaying and neutering animals have any relevance to if the earth is flat or not?

Berny
Believes that pets should be spayed/neutered.
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

?

Thork

Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #596 on: November 03, 2010, 02:01:04 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.
This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

And sometimes of course it isn't.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/071114-eating-young.html
If you only bothered to read it then you would have seen that you just failed with your argument.
If you bothered to read it you would see animals eating their young. That is survival before procreation.  Don't just look at the Avatar, decide you are in opposition with that person and make a judgement on that. Look at the information being presented.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #597 on: November 03, 2010, 02:02:06 PM »
For example getting the female companion isn't usually easy.
This is non sequitur. There is a you personally surviving you and you trying to find a mate are two different things.
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

I disagree. It is a benefit of the survival process. Animals that are sterile survive just fine without reproducing.

How does the effect of spaying and neutering animals have any relevance to if the earth is flat or not?

Berny
Believes that pets should be spayed/neutered.

We are in the middle of a digression where we are discussing whether or not animals evolve or develop habits to make life easier. I say yes. I really don't see how BiJane doesn't get this.

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #598 on: November 03, 2010, 02:10:38 PM »
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.
I disagree. It is a benefit of the survival process. Animals that are sterile survive just fine without reproducing.
You may disagree but evolution doesn't care about that. All this talk starting from OP isn't just about one individual. It's individual and the species survival. So, suck it up and admit your defeat.

Are you capable of individual thought?

Okay, fine, details: short path. Say, two miles long, some in the water where there are piranhas, some on land with savage cannibals. The long path is two and a half/three miles long, protected from animals and attackers. You have no supplies, but on both roots it's possible to stop and pick up food and water.

Well gosh, that is easy. Piranhas only bite creatures that scare them, and even then there are no recorded deaths caused by piranha. So I'll just swim in slow, deliberate movements so that I glide through the water and not make a ruckus. When I get out of the water I'll strip all of my clothes off, and then smother some cherries from a nearby bush on myself so it looks as though I too, am a savage cannibal. I shall then proceed to run though the land screaming strings of sounds and syllables that don't even make sense, again, to blend in. I'll make it faster on the short path than on the longer path. Upon reaching my destination, this act of extreme survival prowess will undoubtedly impress all of the fertile women at the village I am heading towards. This will allow me to more easily spread my loin, and wage war upon the other kingdoms.
That is if you ever make it. Dreaming is nice but the one who took the safest path is already there and got the best woman. And if you ever get to the destination, ragged tired and smeared with all kind of things then you don't have very much chances to impress anyone.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth
« Reply #599 on: November 03, 2010, 02:15:06 PM »
In the case of animals there is not only you surviving. There is always the matter of descendants and the survival of the species. Finding the mate is definitely part of survival process.

And sometimes of course it isn't.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/071114-eating-young.html
If you only bothered to read it then you would have seen that you just failed with your argument.
If you bothered to read it you would see animals eating their young. That is survival before procreation.  Don't just look at the Avatar, decide you are in opposition with that person and make a judgement on that. Look at the information being presented.
In that case you just failed to make your point. What was it? I thought that you presented this link as example for animals who don't care about survival.
 
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.