How do animals fancy each other Page 1 of 4
It’s pretty obvious that animals don’t fancy each other using evolution theories. Animals fancied each other 500 million years ago. The urge to find a partner is absolutely overwhelming in any animal.
If we think of fancying as a kind of concept or phenomena and since fancying is not a physical thing then of course we can’t find fossils of it. Animals fancying their own species must be an all or nothing event. Every animal that has existed or is on earth now , fancies or fancied it’s own species. Fancying ones own species could not have evolved. There is no theory of fancying. We sort of know that. But there is the theory of evolution that sits in our thoughts regarding the physicality of animals in general. Those animals that we have fossils of from 500 million years ago fancied their own species.
There is no evidence of evolution using random mutations and natural selection to come up with the fancying. It is altogether so different from conjecturing about the physicalness of the animals bodies. How did the first animals pass on the ability to fancy different species in the future. That fancying is a one off thing. There is no in-between.
Fancying can’t be explained , just like seeing or hearing can’t be explained. Sight and hearing and smelling are whole. We shouldn’t therefore be content that physical bodies came about any differently to the fancying and seeing and hearing because of a few fossils and genes and DNA and the random mutations ideas. Like sight and hearing , skeletons and flesh and blood surely don’t exist because of our evolution ideas. We know in our thinking that our skeleton did not rely on random mutations and natural selection to exist.
A bit of a try though at how fancying could evolve. Animals are attracted to their own species. So , if animals evolved then that conscious feeling /sense of attraction would have had to have evolved at the same time as the body plan from changes in species and from species to species.. So the physicality of the body would have to be linked to the consciousness or mind or whatever it is for fancying another animal of the same species.
It doesn’t feel like a normality though. How would the male and female be working in unison. The word evolution does not help explain it. We like to say that a physical animal evolved and that fossils and DNA show this or that. The evidence of that is very weak and is mostly conjectural , but sticking with fancying for now , nothing explains that fancying. The strength of the fancying of one species of animal fancying another animal of it’s own species would outweigh any of our constructs of evolution. Fancying is beyond anything.
In some way we think it natural to fancy. But that drive in any animal to fancy is a specific. Did it evolve. It is beyond anything previous and never gets to be out of focus like say a hedgehog one day fancying a frog. In fact if we had no fancying in us we would cringe at the thought of what that fancying leads to body wise.
There is again of course trickiness in thinking about the consciousness or the mind or whatever it is. The physical brain would have changed in the evolutionary way as the body changed. But is the brain linked to consciousness in a way we can think of , for it to be involved with any animal fancying the new animal that it is said to have evolved into.
So just having another go at thinking about it. The brain evolves to fancy another species and if the consciousness is separate then the consciousness would have to evolve at the same time. Or the brain that is evolving controls the consciousness to make animals fancy the same species that evolves into. Or it’s the other way round in that the consciousness makes the brain evolve to fancy another species that the species turns into. Tricky.
Not quite so tricky if animals didn’t evolve into other species at all , but are whole from the start.
Some animals , like birds , fancy each other more in the spring. This occurs around the world at different times of the year as spring occurs at different times. Quite what happens at the equator that doesn’t have distinct seasons like spring or summer , don’t know , will have to look up. But, it makes sense that birds don’t make babies in the season of winter. Actually though , not sure if they fancy each other other all year round and it’s just not biologically possible that babies can’t be made until spring. Doesn’t matter. It’s just the idea that that happening is thought to have evolved. That is , birds make babies after the winter. Just seems that all birds would have become extinct if they did anything other than what they do.
It is hard to think about how a whole succession of species can have changed desires to fancy the next species. Am using ‘fancying’ for simplicity of course. It is to include say thinking. A dog or a cat think differently from each other but at the same time they do have similar thinking like ‘ I’ll go back into the house to get warm and have dinner.’ But every species of animal obviously think differently from each other species in some way. Adding up just the different fancying and different thinking in millions of species multiplies the impossibility of evolution being involved. The ability to go home or to go to water supply is not an ability that has evolved. A ladybird only fancies a ladybird. And each ladybird has their own thinking about their environment like every other animal has their thinking about their own environment.
Spiders fancy spiders , fish fancy fish , octopuses fancy octopuses, crocodiles fancy crocodiles and horses fancy horses. We of course fancy other humans. How could that desire and all the other desires like what to eat evolve at the same time as body plans changed.
So say a fish moved onto land by turning it’s fins into legs and grows lungs to breathe air now that it is out of the water. The fishes thinking or mind or consciousness or drive or whatever that is , would have to evolve at the same time as the body change to fancy another of it’s new type. So the once fish that fancied fish must now have to fancy whatever it turned into. Maybe a kangaroo.
So if the species changes , then so would what it fancies. The it or life or whatever it is would know that attraction to ones own species is necessary. More specifically the fancying of ones own species is absolutely necessary and could not have been naturally selected. Every species of animal has to fancy it’s own species. And they do.
Since it is in someway ensured that all animals will fancy their own species, it is meaningless to use natural selection, random mutations , genes and DNA etc to explain how the physicality’s of any animal or plant has evolved. You’d have to to explain how each one of them evolved. Genes and DNA are as physical as flesh and blood , so the very things that are said to be involved with evolution are physical themselves. It’s just not possible to explain that successful accidental random and changes in the genes and DNA brings about new evolved animals with all their new thinking and fancying without explaining the genes and DNA existence , and how they themselves evolved to be able to do what they can supposedly do.
And in any of those genes or DNA , how would they actually get to get a frog to fancy another frog.
evolution rethink 