Conclusions page 4 of 8

Galaxies and stars. I didn’t take this picture. The Hubble space telescope did.
If animals exist on the planets in those galaxies and they have legs with feet and toe nails and lungs and blood and milk , and the babies in them develop in a womb with an umbilical cord , and there are birds that have beaks and trees that have roots , would that mean that they evolved , or would it mean that they are in some way a universal given.
Am not saying that there are only two ways to think about it in a one or the other way. Not at all. Of course though , if it is some sort of given and all of the above galaxies have animals and trees existing on planets that have the right conditions, that leaves the thinking that animals and the trees just pop up anywhere in the universe.
By the mere thinking that life can or could or does exist on the other planets , we would have to wonder why and how our evolution idea is so prominent.
But life that exists on another planet must be able to stand or fly in that planets gravity and environment. So maybe thinking of the phenomena of them might help , but probably only a bit.
There are surely billions of phenomena on earth and it seems likely that there are many more of them in the billions of galaxies. Seems though like we are trying to pin those phenomena of life and other phenomena all down to our one off thought of evolution. That possibility surely doesn’t exist. Surely not one phenomena can be explained by using our evolution theory.
The most succinct phenomena is male and female. That is in unemotive terms , two sets of bits and pieces that between them make babies. We just know that that does not rely on our evolution ideas. Then there is the phenomena that the male and female fancy each other.

There are then other phenomena like the eating of food. Mouths once upon a time did not exist and evolution theory would say that mouths evolved from some less structured thing into what we would say is a mouth. But if a mouth can be a mouth to do what it does, it surely wouldn’t use evolution. It would use whatever the idea or phenomena of a mouth is. The mouth takes in food , selects what is ok to eat and chews up the food and also breathes in and out the air. The mouth or whatever makes it move would have to know that what it is doing is sending the food to the intestines and that the food is then used to do do whatever it does. After that , every organ and cell in the body gets the food. Surely our idea of evolution is not involved with any of that either.

Using this next bit about food just to add more highlight that natural selection and random mutations are futile explanations of any aspects of life. We might be made of food but …

Firstly eating food is more than providing the body with a substance to make or continue the physicality of the body. Food carries away poisons and toxins produced by the body. When we are hungry, that first swallow of food instantly does the trick. That acid in the gut is ready for it. So the immediate removal of the acid and toxins gives relief. Maybe each different food has the ability to grab the different toxins. So meat , that feels like an instant joy , grabs certain types of toxics and the potatoes grab some other toxins. A few crisps can give relief , but that only lasts for a short period. After that we need a full on meal.

But , is it possible that we are not made of the food that we eat. Could it be that food might provide only energy and nutrients for bodies to exist and remove the toxins. That is , the foods substance or energy is used by the atoms and electrons ability to assemble themselves into cells and whole bodies. In other words , the physicality of a body is not made from food. The phenomena uses the food. But yes , we can say that eating more can make us bigger , but the extra body mass might not be made of the extra food. The extra food just gives the phenomena more substance to make more or less body.

After all , a baby has only milk as food for a few weeks after birth and it grows. So we would think that the milk is turned into the whole baby. And a cow eats only grass all of it’s life , so that grass turns into eyes legs bones and hair and fur and chemicals and a million other things. Natural selection doesn’t turn milk or grass into all those body parts , so why is the idea of natural selection used for anything at all. If the milk or grass gets turned into a whole animal that moves , and even one day plays the piano , why would we imagine that a process like evolution is an explanation for an animal or a plant or even just a toe nail.

We don’t know how or if that food turns into an animal yet are quite prepared to accept that we know how animals evolve into new species. Why would something that can use food to grow from an egg into itself and then eat food to keep itself alive rely on random mutations and natural selection. Millions of different types of eggs turning into millions of different animals and they eat food. The ability to use that food to do what they do must be an all or nothing thing. That ability surely didn’t evolve.

Eating is a bizarre thing (then what isn’t) The cows and sheep seem to do nothing but eat grass all day long , and we too are pretty much eating or drinking for much of the day. Of course the cows and sheep do more than eat , like rearing their young and I did see a sheep one day using it’s head and nose to move it’s lamb from the edge of a steep hillside drop and another sheep stopping a crow from pecking at the eyes of it’s lamb. The cows and sheep though would have been born in a field and just start eating the grass around them. We on the other hand have a plate of a variety of foods. Think roast dinner followed by apple pie and custard. It’s a staggering amount of food that animals eat all day and there has to be enough to go around. So life before it existed must have known that there would be enough. Perhaps there wasn’t enough so animals started to eat each other. Who knows.

In each of the trillions of cells in a human or any other animal body or plant is a nucleus that has these mysterious moving electrons. Apparently they are singular and are not made of any other parts. You couldn’t zoom in with a microscope and see other parts. Googles on them and other particles describe them as being made of electromagnetism which would make our thinking of us being made of food difficult to think about. That they exist is one thing , but are they in our bodies because we eat them. It’s getting back again to the trickiness of putting into words the thinking about it. For now though , are those electrons made of food or do they use the energy from the food we eat to do what they do.

New to me is that there is a forth type of matter. There are gases and liquids and solids of which we are familiar with , and a forth one , plasma. One website says 99 percent of the universe is made of it. Impossible to understand any of it , so don’t rely on any of my thinking. Am just putting down some thoughts. But the Illusive electrons that are made of no other parts, can apparently leave a nucleus of a cell in the body if they absorb a photon of light and then mix with ions to form plasma. When we wonder about why the same amount of food being eaten by one person does different things to another person eating the same amount of food, it’s surely worth a thought about those electrons.

On the main theme though , it is a bit of a stretch to conjecture that electrons and all the other atom parts like neutrons and protons etc use natural selection and random mutations to exist. Very messy. But do they need feeding. And as said earlier they don’t move about like planets and galaxies. So maybe if the physicists get even a bit close to a unification theory to explain the two different workings then they could give something more to unravel the existence of life and plants.

Body before brain conjecture. Is it possible that the brain is forming after the body parts exist. The genes and dna etc and other things are somehow involved in making cells multiply and form body parts then the brain could be forming itself as it gets information say for example that legs and eyes are there. It then sort of maps the body and forms itself and does it’s thing , whatever that is. For example it would have to know how far away the toes are to be able to wiggle them. All conjecture of course , but so to is the idea of evolution. Continuing with conjecture , the brain might be thought of as a product of the body. The brain itself maybe comes about because of the body parts including eyes and ears etc existing first. The brain then somehow comes to be as the body grows and maps the body. In other words , body parts and flesh and ears and toe nails and skeletons start to grow and exist first , followed by the brain. We sort of think that the brain is a controller , but the brain could in some way be secondary to the rest of the bodies existence.

Taking it further , since we can conjecture whatever we like as we don’t know , if we think of the mind and body philosophy thing , then the mind would be relying on the brains mapping of the body. Then if the brain gets damaged or degrades because of age , the mind no longer has all the information it needs to move some muscles or bring up memories. Or on the other hand , if their is no separate mind that is using the brain , then the brain on it’s own brings about what we think of as the mind or consciousness or whatever. One thing that feels for sure though is that nerves send information of some kind to the brain. An anaesthetic can block the signals like the toe is damaged to the brain and since the brain doesn’t get the information , no pain exists. But having said that , am none the wiser. So maybe best to stick to talk about butterflies.

Two butterflies can find each other and stay together over large distances either in the woods or over a few gardens with fences. They can find each other even if they get separated. It’s a wonder how they ever meet up again. That is/might be because they see more or different colours than us with their ultra violate vision and use pheromones as well. And of course they do move in an erratic way , perhaps to avoid prey , and they also flap away and we can easily see them in the garden. But what are they actually doing. They fly around the flowers and trees but only settle down for short periods now and then. Are they mapping the entire area. No idea. What they also seem to do is meet up again and do about five circles around each other. They don’t touch and then fly off , sometimes to the top of very high trees but rarely sitting down.
Bees on the other hand do fly from flower to flower and do their thing. And flowers attract them by having ultraviolet signals to attract them. So the flower knows what it is doing as well. Bit like the conundrum of whether life evolves to work on planet or was planet perfect for life to work on. If there are different animals and plants on planets a little bit different to earth then it would be life working to live on that planet.

If that’s the case then ears and eyes , worms and butterflies , trees and flowers , all know about the physics of light , the distances in space and gravity. They know about electrons and the atoms and molecules that make up air. And they know about maybe the most elusive of them all .. Time.

Conjectures about physical bodies evolving is much easier than conjecturing about time. We don’t know if today fits into the whole of the past or the whole of the future , or that any point in time is more important than any other point in time. That’s not deep thinking or anything. All we can do is conjecture. Animals exist. We just can’t get past that.

It would be interesting to see how evolution of humans continues since we wear clothes and make medicines and have smart phones etc. So evolution would struggle a bit with allowing natural selection and random mutations to select from humans that have access to the best hospitals and food supply from local supermarket. And it would also have to consider that humans now drink alcohol that affects both body and brain and consciousness. If evolution has happened in the past it will be difficult for it to happen to humans in the future. If it does happen then things could go very pear shaped indeed.

Could ears do more than they already do.
Could eyes see more than than they can see.
What would a nose make of a new smell.
How will they fair in the future. All of those parts must know that the future exists.
It just doesn’t feel that an evolutionary process lets them continue.

The idea of evolution and it’s mechanisms are ours. Fossils , DNA , genes , geographical distribution , continual drift and similarities between different animals. It’s hard to think that we can use those ideas to explain a banana or an eye or anything else. Far from enough , in my opinion of course. But what if there is a list of all the animals and their body parts and their colours and abilities , and their chemicals and hormones , and senses and fruits etc that we know of , and a further list of the environments in which they exist including gravity and space and time , and who knows what else. The list would be pretty long. Hard to think where it would end.

Next page

Home