Blood and milk page 2 of 2

All that the fossils on our planet show , is is that different animals have existed. Linking them all up to show that one has evolved into another is just an attempt , and then the railroading gets full on. But i suppose though that this type of thinking , that animals , including their blood and milk didn’t evolve , would mean that animals just pop up as whole entities along with their milk and blood.

In fact , whether it’s evolution , or somehow animals pop up , we would have to expect new life forms in the future. So far though , animal organs and senses seem to be a given in that they have been similar for millions of years and despite the differences in say the shape of their outer bodies , inside all animals rib cage is a very similar set up of organ’s and a similar nervous system connected to a brain.

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. It would with just a bit of thinking though lead to the thought that blood is an all or nothing substance , and no imaginary idea like evolution is involved. Our thinking , has not come up with anything to explain blood and the veins or channels to carry it , other than it existed in the past and exists today and maybe will exist in the future.

If (and I use the word if because of course I don’t know ) If blood and milk did not evolve, then why would a whole animal or plant not use whatever the blood and milk 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. The conjecture that the legs came from the fins of a fish is backed up with no evidence at all. And sensibility tells anyone looking at their own 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 though , 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 oestrogen. 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 surely 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. Just the idea of them and the idea that they might exist on other planets is not easy to conjecture about using evolution ideas. If males and females exists on other planets what do we say about it. Maybe , like the existence of milk and blood, we would have to accept that our evolution ideas about any of these phenomenas are just our simple attempts to explain them .

For any animal to go on separately evolving into new species over the next few million years ahead to be able to have babies would surely 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. When we think of life on other planets , we imagine that there are males and females that make babies made of flesh and blood. No accidental random mutations or natural selection could be possibly involved with having that on all planets in the universe. From there we would have to consider that the idea of random mutations and natural selection is at least unhelpful and totally thought stopping.

There could of course be the thought that evolution occurs on all the planets in the universe in the same way to to bring about blood and flesh and bones and organs etc. That would mean that the outcome was and is always going to be the same. That is , the chemicals and atoms on all new planets that are forming all the time , including today , will somehow evolve blood and flesh , males and females, and bones and teeth etc. It would mean though that evolution is somehow working towards making blood and male and female and organs and everything else before all of those physical things exist.

It would also mean that the evolution of all the organs and features like the eyes, the heart and finger nails etc, were too , always going to happen before they actualy exit. In this sort of thinking though, evolution theory would have a way of making a comeback. It sort of makes more sense than trying to explain that blood and all the rest evolved using random mutations and natural selection. You’d have to have random mutations and natural selection happening on all planets , and that surely wouldn’t come up with say just blood. Quite clearly , if blood exists on all planets with life , then it doesn’t rely on random mutations and natural selection. But it could be still thought that the blood evolved , but just that it was always going to evolve into blood before it evolved.

It would though still be a curiosity as to why something like just blood or a heart that is going to come about , would need a gradual process to become blood and a heart. If there was any argument against the above thinking , it might be that blood and hearts don’t exist on other planets. But if we think that life does exist on other planets, then we imagine that that life on the other planets does have blood and heart’s. So I suppose it’s still about whether all these things evolved or popped up. But all that thinking doesn’t help with explaining the phenomenas of all those things however they came about.

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 common sort of sense thinking would make one 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.. Human babies a few thousand years ago could drink their mothers milk , but after a few months the baby didn’t have much of the enzyme lactase necessary to digest the lactose in say cows milk and so humans couldn’t drink cows milk. Today though we can quite happily drink cows milk. What hapenned?
According to Wikipedia a ‘chance mutation’ occurred that ‘enabled the production of lactase in adulthood’. Now humans could drink an all marvellous 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 to produce enough lactase to digest digest cows milk.
These kind of happenings must be happening all of the time. We are just thinking of lactase. Billions of these things must be happening all the time. Every minute of the day.

The re-production of lactase surly wouldn’t have been naturally selected. 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.

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. Then of course each female animal has to have the body parts to get the milk to the babies and the babies must have the mouth and urge and ability to suckle.

(Have had 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 to make it’s way from an animals 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. Male and female 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.

It/whatever must have known about male and female parts and all other organs including flesh and blood and skeletons and chemicals like blood and milk before they existed and so doesn’t start with half bits and pieces and change them using natural selection or accidental random mutations to evolve into another species.

Next Chapter How do animals fancy each other.

Home