Conclusions page 5 of 8
Image Wikimedia Commons Christopher P. Michel
The possibility of a penguin , and the possibility of a camel , and the possibility of us using our eyes to look at pictures of them. They all didn’t exist and then they did. The only reason that we have in our thoughts that they evolved using random mutations and natural selection is because of simple conjecturing. The theory that life evolved and is evolving is in our thoughts with the word evolution stuck in it , even though there is absolutely no really convincing evidence at all.
It might be that penguins and camels and eyes really did and do evolve , but it just feels that the evidence for it should be overwhelming , and in my opinion only , it isn’t overwhelming. A penguin seems like a singularity and so does a camel and so does an eye or a lung or a toe nail.
It’s just as easy to conjecture that an animal can have an eye or any body part or whatever it likes because they can in some way be had.
Quite why any animal would want to sort of grab all the body parts available and then endure a living life is for some other kind of thinking , but all of these body parts that could sit on the earth in it’s gravity , existed millions and millions of years ago and are still here today.
There are no new senses that exist today that we know of in the bodies of animals today that didn’t exist all that time ago. They are still the same.
In some way there is or must be a limitation to the types of senses , otherwise new ones would be added on regularly.
Five senses is a small number. But that’s what we have found. Sight , sound , smell , taste and something else , can’t remember the other one. But those senses are possessed by all animals.
So how is it that no other senses have come about , or even evolved. Obviously the occurrence of the senses are a given existence , in that they didn’t have to evolve. We could say that the physical bodies evolved , but since the senses seem specific , it would lead to the thought that an animal also didn’t evolve. But no new senses seem to have come about since the main five that were there from the first animals. Senses are critical to life and they existed in the very first animals. That would mean that a sense existed in an instant and didn’t evolve.
Could it be in the world of conjecture , that it is more likely that animals and plants , whatever they are , knew that the right conditions on earth existed and so came to be. The penguin knew that the cold polar regions of the earth existed and came to be.
Like us humans , penguins and camels can stand up all day long using very similar organs like hearts that pump blood up to the head and down to the feet. We can try and wonder about each species of animal or plant but they all share similarities. Maybe no animal or plant has ever had to evolve because the senses and body parts are already available and can be used in all sorts of setups. All conjecture , but so are evolution theories.
It certainly feels like our conjecture of evolution thought that we have come up with , has nothing to do with just that standing up ability. Most animals have a heart to get the blood to every part of their body. We’d have to imagine that somehow an organ like the heart has evolved in all species of animals. That makes no sense. Animals totally unrelated to each other have hearts. Hearts seem like a given. So why would an animal rely on using our evolution theories to evolve to changing environments when it somehow has a heart. It is quite obvious that a heart doesn’t rely on any of our evolution theories so why would a whole animal or a plant or a tree.
I have come up against a flaw in my thinking . Not on the heart. But Just read that penguins only exist in south of earth and polar bears only exist in north. Having to rethink myself now. Googling away on why don’t penguins exist on north pole and why polar bears don’t exist on south pole. Goodness. Might have to change whole thinking. Don’t know. Maybe there is something specific to explain it otherwise would have to say that penguins evolved in the south Antarctic regions and couldn’t move north. Having to have a rethink about my rethinking.
it is very/oddly fortunate for the penguins that there are no polar bears or foxes in the Antarctic (south pole) as the polar bear or fox would eat all the eggs in a penguin colony in one sitting , so penguins wouldn’t last long. In the Arctict (north pole ) polar bears and foxes do live there and there are no penguins. Apparently the polar bears and foxes were able to walk or swim from other lands to get there.
The Antarctic has no nearby land for the polar bear or fox to get there. The Antarctic (south pole) is completely separated from any means for polar bears or foxes to get there. So while I rethink my rethinking , did penguins know that they could live in relative safety in the Antarctic and also know that they couldn’t live in the Arctic. Or did that idea of natural selection acting on random mutations allow them to thrive by chance in that Antarctic environment. More trickyness.
All of the big animals that we say have evolved are said to have started somewhere. Humans in Africa and polar bears on land outside of the Arctic and penguins in the Antarctic and each has moved to other parts of the earth. Seems straight forward.
Sort of leaves the thought though that there could be an unlimited number of other animals that could exist but don’t exist on earth because they would be eaten up straight away and that they know that , so don’t come to exist.
To follow on , it would be that our thinking of the possibilities of anything at all about animals or anything at all is constrained to what we observe. So like the possibilities of animals that could be on earth but are not on earth , we could look at all the phenomenas like make and female and consider that there are phenomenas that could exist here on earth but don’t. It’s unimaginable what other phenomenas could be. We can list phenomenas like digestion or sight or enjoyment, but it’s impossible to conjure up a phenomena that we don’t know about. It’s not as simple as imagining a differently shaped animal that is not on this planet.
A quick go at it though. We have the phenomena of male and female. That’s two different bodies that make a baby. To make the baby takes just the two of them. On another planet there could be the phenomena that three bodies are needed to make a baby. So they have a male and female and something else. Seems unlikely. Of course some animals have lots of legs and eyes but to make the babies takes only two , so maybe numbers of anything existing is another phenomena.
Carrying on for now though while I revalue my thinking after the penguin and polar bear thing. The camel knew that a desert existed and came to be and the penguin knew that there were no bears or foxes in the Antarctic so also came to be. There is something of a monstrosity going on to explain how a penguin has the blubber and feathers to survive in the Antarctic and that a camel has the body to deal with dry conditions like the Sahara. Was going to say that camels humps store the water , apparently not. The humps store fat and water is stored in other places in the body. But the camel can survive in the desert and can drink 32 gallons of water when it gets the chance.
Freepix.com
If we imagine that a substance like blood did not evolve from non blood and that organs like lungs did not evolve from non lungs , then the penguin and camel could also always have been whole animals with the blood and lungs.
If another planet with cold and hot and dry regions on it has penguins and camels on it , it could mean that penguins and camels look for and pop up on the planets that have the right conditions. It would mean that the penguin and camel did not simply evolve or didn’t evolve using our ideas of natural selection and accidental random mutations. If we imagine that penguins or camels do exist on other planets and that they did evolve from another species on that planet then it would mean that evolution doesn’t rely on chance. Evolution would have a predictability about it. It would be that a species will evolve into a penguin or camel to live in this or that environment. That would go against what evolution theory is about.
A more simple thought about it would be to just think again about flesh and blood and milk. What if they exist on other planets. When we think about the likelihood of life on other planets, we are sort of imagining it to have similarities to life here on earth , even if the animals are a bit different. But if they walk and swim and eat food , then we sort of imagine that they have flesh and blood and bones and milk. Maybe it could be put in a better way. Say an animal on a new planet is coming about and it needs to move to get food. Legs with feet do a very good job and they already exist on other planets. It would sort of seems obvious , that since legs with feet on other planets exist , then the new animal on a new planet wouldn’t rely on random mutations and natural selection to come up with legs and feet. How would random mutations and natural selection come up with legs and feet on all planets with life on them.
Quite possible too would be that if there were humans on another planet , they would also be wondering if life on other planets have flesh and blood etc. Maybe one day we might be able to clear it all up with one phone call to another planet. We could discuss maybe toe nails. Between us we would be wondering how could toe nails have been naturally selected to exist at the end of our feet on the end of the top of the toes , and happen to exist on both of our planets. We could also discuss how we have the same or similar physical digestion systems using the same organs. I suppose though , that if they also have apes and monkeys on their planet , it would throw a spanner into my thinking.
On the other hand though , if we sent a picture of an ape or monkey to them , they might say that there are none of them are on their planet but they have some other animal that they think they evolved from. They might though have fossils showing that apes and monkeys came after humans. Hopefully we’d have a laugh about it all as we have a think , and say , no idea. The next picture we might send could be of a bunch of bananas. They might say yea we’ve got those. They might then send back pictures of the fruits on their planet. We would of course discuss how the phenomena of fruits exist and how all the animals have the different ways to make babies in the same way on each of our planets. For certain though would be our shared puzzlement about how any phenomena comes to be physical.
A look at any animals physical body doesn’t explain how the animal has the parts to eat the food and certainly doesn’t explain how the animal feels hungry. I can’t quite put the thought down in words , but having ago in next couple of paragraphs.
If all of those body parts and substances and feelings of hunger are universal , then if we think just about just the blood and that hunger, and all animals in the universe have blood and hunger, then the evolution ideas that we have , would mean that somehow natural selection and random mutations come up with blood and the feeling of being hungry on every planet.
But evolution wouldn’t explain the universality of blood or flesh or bones or feeling hungry. It would mean that blood and flesh and bones were always going to be. In other words , the evolution process , if there was one , would always come up with the same body parts like legs on all planets in the universe. If evolution always comes up with legs for the animal to move then evolution would have to have a sort of plan to evolve legs with feet at the end of them. But our evolution theory is about natural selection acting on random mutations. That wouldn’t make sense because the end result is always legs.
With our thoughts , we also don’t know how we or other animals move. Since we imagine that animals on other planets move we would have to wonder how our evolution ideas explain that ability to walk or run or hop or jump. Evolution thought is a problem. Doesn’t matter how we use it as a thinking tool , it would mean that our evolution ideas would say that life with all the flesh and blood on other planets evolved. That would mean that evolution on all planets in the universe comes up with the same things like flesh and blood and legs that walk.
Legs that walk , and blood that has the colour red , and eyebrows that sit nicely above the eyes , and babies that rely on parents to feed them , surely don’t rely on our evolution theories. All of those , might , or probably do exist on other planets. If they do , then the words random mutations and natural selection would be useless.
Is the word evolution far to weak a thought to explain anything. The word evolution carries a weight of conviction. Seems more likely that blood and hunger and moving and lungs and the senses and fancying have always been whole things and so to have penguins and camels , and that they were all possibilities before they existed. The word zeitgeist again comes to mind. That is , we use a single idea in the spirit of the times to sum up all that we think about anything. In our case the word evolution has in it enough to sum up a whole thinking to explain the development of animals and plants. But it certainly doesn’t do that. It explains nothing at all.
We can’t see what’s on other planets so it’s a bit of a problem to know if it’s universal. The possibility of a telephone call to another planet is imaginary as the nearest earth like planet is said to be over four light years away. That’s a long way. But if we were though able to see another planet like earth with seas and rivers and deserts but it had no life or trees on it, we would feel mystified. Our only hope at the moment is that visitors from other planets visit us. It is said that they would have been here before if they could do it. But they might only pass by say every 50,000 years and maybe next time think we would be worth a visit. Not saying cave man wasn’t worthy of a visit. The visitors might not have spotted them. This time they would see millions of people living in great big cities and bombs going off. Would be nice to see their videos of what exists on their planet.
(Mentioned evolution would have to consider humans and alcohol in previous page.. certainly the case in above paragraph.) However , evolution would also have to contend with humans ability to think in the way that it does to now build things like houses using tools , and at the same time communicate with telephones and travel from one environment to another and live in it. Evolution , for humans , using random mutations and natural selection would now be at an end. Wouldn’t matter how many humans go for a paddle in the water , none of us will now turn into a whale.
evolution rethink 