Blood.

Blood and it’s composition of white cells and immunity things and it’s ability to carry oxygen through the body would not rely on this random mutations natural selection idea either. Blood has veins to carry it and a heart to pump it around. Blood on it’s own would be useless. And the heart and veins would also be useless without the blood flowing through them. So the whole setup and their compositions would not have been naturally selected. Leaving this idea of natural selection and even evolution without any evidence at all to linger in people’s minds or consciousness or whatever to explain all these life things stops all thought.

freepik.com

This kind of wondering about how the blood and a heart and veins exist to work with each other is explained away by saying it happened over millions of years. That is that evolution has had millions of years to do do it. But even eyes existed 500 million years ago and so did blood and the animals could move. Common sense thinking would say that even if you went back in time one day at a time you wouldn’t get to a day when the blood and veins and heart existed in their own. They would all have to exist at the same time.

Also the blood would have different immunity and other things over time but each of those new things wouldn’t have acidentaly evolved. If a new immunity property to fight a new disease is in the blood it would not be in the blood because it was naturally selected. It would be in the blood to fight the new disease and we cannot explain it. We try to explain it by saying that it was an accidental genetic mutation and that because it was beneficial it was naturally selected to continue. Doesn’t make sense.

It’s s not just the physical structures of these body parts . What makes the heart pump the blood around the body at maybe 70 beats in a minute. A biology book might say that electrical signals are sent by the brain to change the heart beat rate when we move or see something or think something. So now we have to add a brain to make it four things that are needed. The brain is very busy. Blood is just one of goodness knows how many fluids that are in the body. Thinking would then be , what is being sent to the brain to enable the brain to send the electrical signals. It would go on and on. Hard to think that the brain is reliant on nothing else whereas the organs etc are reliant on the brain. No idea.

It’s just quite bizarre how our thinking has come to try to explain life using natural selection and accidental random mutations. Polar bears in the snowy Antarctic surely don’t have white fur because white fur was naturally selected. It’s been conjectured there was or were some albino bears and they were naturally selected , but that’s simply conjecture.

If we found that life on other planets has blood we would have to wonder even more on how blood exists. It sort of seems quite likely that they would have blood, unless life on earth is a one off , which to me seems like 100 percent unlikely.

Just thinking about that blood though. Of course there can be no fossils of it so we can’t conjecture about it like we can about maybe a bony structure like a skull. There might be just evidence showing that the blood travelled through the bodies of animals millions of years ago. I would bank on it though that blood is an all or nothing substance and no imaginary idea like evolution is involved. Our thinking can not come up with anything to explain blood.

If (and I use the word if because of course I don’t know ) If blood did not evolve, then why would a whole animal or plant not use whatever the blood used to be able to exist. Or even use whatever the animal uses to move the arms and legs. If we think of concepts then legs exist to walk or run or maybe to climb trees.

Then just the concept of walking or being able to move must have existed before legs existed. Life once did not exist and then it did and at some point life had legs and was able to move them. Legs do a task. The concept of walking surely doesn’t exist by using mutations and natural selection. And sensibility tells anyone looking at their legs with feet and toes at the end of them that they were not naturally selected from anything else. And of course that kind of thinking could be applied to all organs and body parts in millions of animals species.

Sticking with blood for a moment . The blood also carries around loads of hormones. A very handy way for the hormones to make their way to all the body organs to do what they do. Take just one of them. Say estrogen. We would have to wonder about how accidental random mutations and natural selection came up with just that one hormone and have it carried in the blood to all the body organs to do what it does . A single hormone obviously didn’t evolve. No medical 300 page chemistry book just on this one hormone would attempt to say that it evolved. It’s an all or nothing hormone and same for the countless other ones.

Then we have male and females and we just cant conjecture at all , as this is an immense fact. Males and females exist. Natural selection could not be involved with the existence of or the future of that phenomena. And it is a phenomena. Males and females exist. There is no way to explain that males and females exist using any theories at all. For them to go on separately evolving into new species over the next few million years ahead to be able to have babies would not rely on natural selection and random mutations. In a way there isn’t just one animal in a species evolving, there are two , male and female, and they each would have to evolve at the same time to be able to have babies with each other. These simple invented ideas of mechanisms like natural selection etc, could not be involved with say the evolution of a females baby carrying womb without informing the male to evolve at the same to the changes in the female.

If we think from there then there is no conjecture at all that can be made to explain male and female. None whatsoever. No accidental random mutations or natural selection could be possibly involved with that. From there we would have to consider that the idea of random mutations and natural selection is at least unhelpful and totally thought stopping.

Understanding what these mutations are is a bit beyond what I can grasp. Seemingly it is an accidental mistake in the DNA that happens occasionally in the animal , a bit like maybe a spelin mistace or two in this paige , and if it is advantageous to the animal then natural selection let’s those with it to go on and have more babies.. (Under no circumstances trust me on this .. I’m sure you won’t) But my sort of common sense thinking makes me wonder how an animal could continue to breathe or circulate blood by allowing these accidental mutations to change the structure of lungs and hearts and at the same time add other organs and organize them to fit in the body etc. Then skeletons of both male and female of course would have to evolve at the same time to accommodate all the changes.

Continuing with mutations.. Humans a few thousand years ago couldn’t digest milk too well after a few months of being a baby. Adults didn’t have much of the enzyme lactase to digest the lactose in say cows milk. Wikipedia says that a ‘chance mutation’ occurred that ‘enabled the production of lactase in adulthood’. Now humans could drink an all marvelous nutritional substance. If that happened then isn’t it more likely that the genes or whatever with their arsenal of possibilities reintroduced the lactase with purpose and did not rely on that idea of chance mutations. Humans drank the cows milk and the genes or whatever picked up on it and gave the human body the ability to once again produce enough lactase to digest cows milk.

The initial production of lactase in the babies wouldn’t have been naturally selected. Babies need lactase. It occured and after it occured we could imagine that the humans who first acquired it could survive in a time of food shortage and pass on their genes and we could say that that is natural selection. But explaining it this way skips over how the enzyme, which in itself itself is a whole thing , was reintroduced to allow the human to now drink cows milk. Milk could in a non sensible way exit on it’s own. It’s so exquisite like fancying.

Since humans already ate animals they would easily have a test of drinking other animals milk. It may have gave them bloated feeling but saved their lives. An enzyme speeds up the metabolism of digestion. (Once again don’t trust me on this. Sure you won’t , but I just can’t see how any enzyme like lactase itself could evolve into itself and be useful to allow humans to comfortably drink the cows milk ) The human baby thousand’s of years ago had the lactase enzyme for say six months to drink it’s mother’s milk then the lactase was no longer produced after that. Somehow when the older humans tried the milk of say cows , over time the genes produced the lactase again.

Milk is produced by all mammals. Like blood , milk is so specific with all it’s substance. Milk wouldn’t have started off in say one part of the earth and spread because of continental drift. It couldn’t have drifted through the air , and it’s mere existence shouldn’t make us rush out looking for fossils to prove that it evolved. ( Having a reread of the Wikipedia article and again no evidence of lactase suddenly turning up. It points to another page that could be twenty pages long of gobbledygook.)

Add to this in general that water and food has in lots of animals to make it’s way from the mouth then through the body. In between the mouth and the end there is of course digestion and the whole body using the food and water. Even if an animal evolves it surely wouldn’t use accidental random mutations and natural selection to be able to course the flow of food and water and blood through new body plans.

One oddity of it is how we ourselves could be content to think that that we know how it all works, and then go on to tell other people that that is how it all happens. I’ll take a punt that even though almost all scientists say they accept that evolution comes about through mutations and natural selection , they don’t actually believe it. And they certainly don’t believe it is all done in a blind or unknowingly sort of way , despite all literature saying that that is fact.

A first natural thought when thinking about evolution is if all of life has evolved then ‘does evolution know what it is doing.’ It’s asked a lot on Google and is mostly followed by ‘no’ and then that these accidental random mutations and natural selection explains it all and that it is all done in a blindly sort of way. Never any evidence of it. Just the use of those words. And they often end by asking the questioner if they had done science at school. I myself don’t remember being shown any evidence of natural selection in school science lessons. In fact can’t even remember the subject of evolution in any lesson.

Plenty of documentaries on the extraordinariness of animals and plants online so won’t fill this with more than a couple of examples. No 300 page book here. In the main for this 20 minute read, natural selection and the rest of it needs a rethink./ (trying to think how to say it , maybe the whole of idea that evolution .. still thinking) Anyway just thoughts. Moving on ….

Quick summary of life on earth.. Planet earth formed 4.5 billion years ago. Bacteria/life 3.5 billion years ago. Some things in between. Then 500 million years ago life grew on a massive scale. And it happened in tiny amount of historical time , like 10 million years. The period is known as Cambrian explosion period. It’s hard to imagine time scales. But worth a minutes thought on it’s own. Some say that oxygen was now more available and life and plants flourished in it straight away. It/life whatever it is , knew the oxygen was now available. So that would mean it knew about that oxygen and how to use it before it itself even existed. It also knew that light and sound waves exist. Thinking in terms of random mutations and natural selection is a triviality to the reality of the existence and immensity of life.

Physicists are trying to understand why planets and galaxies don’t seem to work in the same way that things on the very small level like atoms and electrons work. They are looking for what they call a unification theory. If they get somewhere to find it then the words and thoughts they use might help to continue discussing life and animals and plants.

Google’s on DNA and genes showing evolution doesn’t make much sense. There is a lot of computer software analogies about information in a strand of DNA. Will leave that for now.. It’s complicated to understand.. But ..

It’s hard to think how natural selection could on the one hand let those animals that survived best in their current environment to pass on the body plan to next babies and at same time change say for example a females birth giving womb in one species of animal say for simplicity a fish to a human while the male doesn’t have one. And that would have to be applied to all species of animals. Millions of them. And plants and flowers.

Seriously , how does this one work. Human male and female and millions of other animals bits and pieces working/evolving together at the same time as changing from one species of animal to another and each animal looking for the other companion for millions of years and it still works from something like natural selection. One has testicles and the other has ovaries that would sort of have to know about each other. There then exists a process involving the brain and hormones to have some of the millions of the eggs in the female ovaries that have been there since birth to be made available to make a baby each month.

How does that or any phenomena exist. They are whole things. We can’t say that any phenomena has evolved. So why would we say that the physicalities of any phenomenas have evolved either.

Hard to imagine how any of the unfathomable number of other phenomenas and physical processes like food digestion have evolved. The process of making the eggs available is specific. It is easy to conjecture that natural selection is involved with the physical bodies of animals to survive in different environments, but processes are fundamentally whole systems that each have to exist with other systems. They are phenomenas. That would override any reliance on random mutations and natural selection to be involved with their existence.

Take one part of the human body involved in the process to digest food , the intestines. They are a whole 15 foot structure in an adult to do what they do. But any thinking of it’s existence would be a question of whether it evolved or it exists with no answers to how it exists. It is part of a system to process food that has to be there. Evolution with it’s weight of thought doesn’t explain a whole physical system that must have to be in place to eat food from the start. Doesn’t matter if we look at the first finds of fossils from 500 million years ago, those animals had whole systems including abilities to eat and see and move and fancy each other.

Next Chapter How do animals fancy each other.

Home