Railroading .. page 3 of 3
Back though on just thinking about a beavers teeth. Even first thoughts would still be how would natural selection be involved with putting iron in the enamel of a beavers teeth. Nothing explains it. Genes and dna might help explain why there are similar parts or structures or chemicals in animals but the link to say it shows evolution between species is very weak. It could simply be that toe or finger nails or hooves on feet are made using that type of gene or dna. It wouldn’t mean that an animal with similar dna to another animal evolved from one or the other. It would just mean they have the same type of dna that makes say the chemicals found in finger nails or hooves.
Just our thinking about how we might be thinking about this while reading words would make one wonder how we are thinking about it. What is that thinking thing that doesn’t seem to be physical like a whole animal or just those teeth. If we can think about it then why accept this thing called natural selection when the ability to think about it exists. Why wouldn’t it or whatever use the ability of being able to think to choose to make enamel to coat the teeth.
Like the ability to think or ponder about these things and to conjecture about things , we could invent the idea that since we have a consciousness or mind thing then there could be a superduper consciousness in us or any other animal or plant body that is doing the working out of choosing and making that enamel. After all , we can’t sit back and think that in all the universe our consciousness thinking thing is the cleverest.
Same with the easiness to conjecture about say animal flight. Why not conjecture that birds did not evolve in the way that evolution theory says it did by some animal at first climbing a tree and then gliding to the floor using aerodynamics and then evolving feathered wings. We could conjecture that they evolved from some light animal like a butterfly or insect that realized that the wind moved them in the air and then a flap of their wings moved them this way or that. Then over time they turn into a bird.
Or conjecture that inside of us is some sort of invisible spring like in a watch that gives us the life span we have. Easy and endless to do , like explaining away that life is wholly about DNA and genes and random mutations and natural selection.
Probably the greatest use of thought is the question of how would a whole body like a chicken or egg suddenly appear without evolving. Like all of us i’m more at a loss on that one. But it’s worth a thought that any baby starts at a microscopic level. Since it can do that there would be no need for random mutations to make that happen. A snail start’s at the microscopic size then goes on to develop and look for another snail. Since the snail can do that it would mean that it wouldn’t rely on random mutations etc. A slug also doesn’t rely on anything apart from being a slug and looks for another slug once borne. And millions of other animals start in the same way. A foetus is microscopic and turns into a whole animal that fancies it’s own species. How. No idea. But since it does that , life would use whatever it uses to do that to come about in the first place, rather than rely on our invention ideas of natural selection and random mutation.
Why take this this natural selection idea to heart when any idea is easy to come up with. Maybe frustration in not knowing what anything is about. More later. I don’t mean that that idea was invented for a wrong reason. It was just Charles Darwin and a couple of others having a think about how these birds had different beaks. And now it’s stuck in science almost as fact.
Any Google read on what natural selection is , brings up gobbledegook. Try the London Natural History Museum explanation of it or any respected university or newspapers grasp of it. They have no idea about what they are talking about and have no evidence and so they give the reader a link to those that supposedly do. Try reading this link that on that page that sends the reader to understand that ‘new species can evolve within a lifetime’. Skim it first or you might get a headache like I did. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6372/224
Totally not understandable to my reading abilities and wanting to know about natural selection. Then try to find any evidence on a following page from the museum that starts with a couple of one liners about DNA to explain ‘convergent evolution’. If anyone didn’t read the start twice the rest might just sink in as fact. For example it says that ‘Many creatures developed the ability to move through the air’ and that ‘they may have evolved this trait to better evade predators, possibly first hopping, jumping and gliding, then developing flight from there’. That is quite ridiculous.
Then follows , crabs , dolphins , hedgehogs , bats and snakes use mutations , beneficial traits and ‘natural selection at work.’ And that eyes work like a camera. No evidence at all. uhttps://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/convergent-evolution.html . That’s why i say later that it is not fair on the scientists or teachers to have that on their shoulders to have to tell it to others. In fact though its a good one page article. Just the first picture comparing a bats wing to a birds wing is standout. The article points out that animals and plants that have similar features like wings are not as closely related to each other as we might assume. They say they have evolved or adapted these similar features on different continents but are not related.
To me , if the animals with wings are not closely related by DNA then flying animals occur to fly. And birds beaks crack seeds. And males and females exist. And because it happens between continents then all of those above including penguins and camels might possibly pop up on other planets too. Since animals exist with the features and senses that we know about without links to each other , then they pop up. No evolution. The senses of seeing and hearing and feeling occur. No amount of naturally selecting brings about the senses , so no amount of natural selection brings about a whole animal or a tree.
All the other google websites are spectacularly less than convincing about evolution. No evidence. Nothing. No evidence at all. Just conjectures. No explanation of how natural selection chose enamel to coat teeth or choose toe nails to protect toes , or eye lashes to stop dust and water getting into eyes. Nothing.
The only way to use the idea of natural selection would be to say that animals with the best teeth enamel and best toe nails and the best eye lashes were more likely to survive and have more babies. But since an animal or plant exists in the first place , however they came to be , they wouldn’t need to rely on something like the imaginary natural selection and random mutations to continue.
Bird beak shapes do not simply exist because a whole host of shapes and sizes and compositions made of whatever atoms and molecules were tried out along the way to crack seeds and nuts and chew up a whole mouse or eat a worm. We would firstly have to explain how the atoms were assembled to form any one of the beaks.
Same again with our hands. Never mind the assembly of the fingers on a hand with nails connected to an arm, and then a brain , you’d firstly have to explain how the atoms and molecules form the physicalness of them. After that it would surely be that the fingers on our hands are not configured using trial and error. Hard to imagine that thumbs and the little fingers were naturally selected. They both work together along with the middle fingers and the other fingers on the other hand. Surely that wouldn’t be evolution getting two arms with hands and fingers on them. That ability to wiggle the fingers surely didn’t evolve so why would we think the fingers evolved.
When we look at our own fingers and wiggle them it is hard to put that ability to wiggle them down to our evolution theory. We can only wiggle them or we can’t. The ability to wiggle the fingers surely did not evolve. It’s a whole ability like seeing or hearing. There is no point in having fingers that can’t be wiggled. Therefore the ability to move the fingers must have something to do with the physical fingers.
No millions of years comes up with that. So two hands with thumbs and fingers on the end of two human arms surely don’t exist because of random mutations and natural selection, even if they were once on a monkey or apes hand. They would use what the atoms and molecules use to get them there in the first place to get them to there present day state.
The word evolution suggests that a progression has occurred towards getting the whole hand with its fingers together into it’s today present form. It would also have to involve the brain or mind thing that would have to wiggle the newly shaped fingers , and send blood and nerves to them.
Tracing the path backwards with fossils and genes and DNA and continental drift is our attempt to prove evolution. That railroading finds some plausibility’s , like two animals with a million years between them looking alike in some way , and then follows the conjecture that one evolved into the other. It is skipped over that both of the animals had flesh. Surely flesh wasn’t something that evolved from non flesh , so if flesh can occur , it wouldn’t be relying on evolution conjectures to make itself restructure itself to fit around the evolving skeleton of a supposedly evolving animal.
Looking ahead , it feels like no amount of holding a pencil or typing on a computer or playing the piano is going to change the configuration of our hands. If hands and fingers do change in the future it would be more likely that the ability of being able to wiggle the fingers would make those changes rather than any random mutations or natural selection. Once again easy to conjecture about. But if it does happen and a sixth finger comes to be on our hands then the new flesh on the new sixth finger would surely not use our conjectures of random mutations to form itself around the new finger and produce a new finger nail all connected to the brain
Could it be that hands and wings and teeth and whole animals like a dinosaur and a penguin and trees are an all or nothing thing. That to me today seems more likely. All mammals and many other animals have the same organs like hearts and lungs and livers and are organised in similar ways. Our organs inside our rib cage are as similar to the monkeys as they are to a mouses or a sheep or a pig. That would mean that since the same organs and organisation of them and body parts and senses exist in animals not related to each other , then they did not evolve from one to the another.
If we carry on and think of any other body part like the nose , then the nose is there doing what it does. The above article on convergent evolution would mean that noses and particularly the ability to sense smell would mean that the possibility of noses existed before the physical noses came about. That is that noses and the sense of smell in different animals are features that exist in animals in all countries in animals that are not related to each other. Therefore noses would not have evolved. The possibility of smelling exists then noses occur on different animals not related to each other.
Then those unrelated animals have male and female parts and organs that work together to make a baby. Two distinctive body plans that would have to evolve at the same time as each other. That seems like an impossibility using natural selection ideas. Each would have to know how the other was evolving , so if it is that millions of species evolve male and female body plans at the same time then it would go into the realm of planning or knowing or magic..
It is more than just difficult to explain those phenomena using natural selection and random mutations. Those noses and toe nails and fingers on two hands , and male and female organs and body parts and sensing , could not rely on any of the conjectures that we have come up with. There is absolutely no evidence at all that those body parts or whole animals evolved or at least evolved using our conjectures. Whole animals with a whole set of similar and similarly organised sets of organs including the ability to have babies seems more like a given than any of our ideas of a kind of gradual development.
Take the physical ears on both sides of our head. They are surely in their present form to be able to help us hear. It’s obvious that to take in sound waves for us to hear that the ears are there to do that. That would mean that a body has the ears to take in the sound waves and send them to the brain or whatever. However , it or whatever would have to know about sound waves before the physical ears exist. Therefore the profound knowing about the sound waves existing before the existence of ears , would surely just make a pair of fully functioning ears in one go.
If the nose and eyes and mouth already existed on the face then it maybe chose the available space on the side of the head to have one ear one one side of the head and one on the other side. But anything that knows about sound waves before any ears existed wouldn’t mess around with our evolution ideas to make ears evolve slowly over time. In all likelihood, the eyes and noses and mouths came together at the same time as the ears to fit on a face or head. Of course though, the head would have to exist and it’s hard to imagine that it was a blank thing with a skull and brain inside it ready to deal with ears and eyes and a mouth with teeth suddenly turning up. We absolutely know that the faces of any animal do not use any of our theories of natural selection acting on random mutations.
Then , on all other things , a humming bird has a long beak to get to the nectar deep inside a flower. A pelicans beak whips out a fish in the sea like a cradle then digests it in its body. How. No idea. But something called natural selection doesn’t aid or in anyway bring about those beaks or the enamel that covers teeth or the toe nails or the eye lashes and eyebrows or the millions of other body parts and chemicals. And here are just a few body parts in just humans that work automatically while we are awake or are asleep. And they all work together. Evolution theories don’t explain any of this either.
evolution rethink 