Conclusions page 1c

Do eyelids sit on top of the eyes. They do. Did the eyelids need to evolve to be there to protect the eyes. Seems unlikely. Seems most likely that they didn’t need to evolve at all. If they had evolved they would in someway have to know that the eye was there and they would want to protect the eyes , or the eyes in someway called for the eyelids to be there.
No thoughts so far help with us understanding it , but we surely have to be careful when using the word evolution when thinking about these things. We wouldn’t say for example that eyelids evolved into eyelids over millions of years because the earliest eyes didn’t need them and then eyes at some point needed them. We could of course say that , but that would have to be the same for all body parts that have some sort of protection.
Take the skin that covers the whole human body. It is hard to think that our evolution ideas of random mutations and natural selection have anything to do with that cover of skin. The skin would have to cover the whole body from the start , it couldn’t cover just the arms and not the legs.

It would follow in simple thinking that the eyes are there to see and the ears are their to hear , and it would again be , did the eyes have to evolve to see and did the ears have to evolve to hear. The eyes would have to have known about light and the ears would have known about sound waves. But did the physicalities have to evolve to see and hear. Just seems highly unlikely that the stupendous occurrences of seeing and hearing called on evolution to produce physical eyes and ears to enable the seeing and hearing.

It is quite possible that with the thoughts that we now have , we might have more thoughts to come up with soon on say how we and other animals move the body. How we have or how we are able to have these thoughts is of course a part of the whole thing , and the putting down in words what we think is going on has been done for quite a while. But our thoughts are progressing. That might be a learning thing or going again into the realms of conjecture , be a given.
The possibility of thinking about how we do think today maybe could have been done fifty thousand or even three hundred thousand years ago , but maybe it’s only today that we can ponder about whether evolution theory is useful or not. The strength of the thoughts can only be on the thinking that is available. So presumably the thoughts ability that we have today could have been had in the past , but the thoughts that we have today are based on the extra knowledge of biology and chemistry and physics etc.

But even the earliest humans knew that a man and a woman were different. What or how they thought about it is not known. It might not have ever been a thought in their thinking as to why or how the difference between a man and a woman occurs or is there. They might have, but maybe not in the way that we can do today. Obviously they did know that there were men and that there were women , but did they wonder about how there could be that difference in man and a woman. Maybe they did wonder , but stopped short of inventing any evolution conjectures. They could though have thought that no evolution process can bring about the differences between a man and a woman’s body that are necessary to make a baby. No one can come up with an explanation for it.

We are of course still today only fleetingly wonder about the fact that there are men and women or male and female. Just occasionally though , anyone might wonder why one of us is a man and another of us is a woman , and in general neither of us feels any oddity about it. But it does exist.
The occurrence of it has the hallmarks of the question of which came first , the chicken or egg. I havn’t got much here , but even so , we could ask which came first , the man or the woman. The man and woman surely have to exist at the same time.
It’s just that that occurrence seems unexplainable using our evolution ideas , and it would follow with our today thoughts , that just one , either man or woman , would need more than evolution , never mind the two of them.

Of course , then we would have to wonder what was in the very first animals or plants or anything else on planet earth that had in them the ability to carry on for millions and millions of years and still be here today. What was in them to start with , to still be here today. Maybe it doesn’t work that way. No idea.
Don’t know if it’s still thought this way , but it was or still is in our thoughts that fish , millions of years ago , waddled onto the land and evolved into all the animals that exist today. But , the first fish before they moved onto land had eyes and movement and looked for a partner. That urge to find a partner would have been the very same urge that exists today. It’s a phenomena like no other. It just doesn’t seem that that phenomena evolved.
In one go you have to have animals that are driven in some way to make babies. Quite when humans knew that they were making babies is not known. It is a sort of passed down knowing thing. Do the fishes know that they are making babies. No idea. But the phenomena makes sure that they find and fancy their own species. Surely random mutations and natural selection has nothing to do with that.

The word evolution implies that life itself is relying on evolution to help it be successful. That would mean that the spider relied on evolution to cause or bring about it’s physicalities to enable it to spin webs. Then the toes at the end our feet relied on evolution to add toe nails , and then the phenomena of males and females relied on evolution to cause their bits and pieces to be different from each others to make babies. It just seems thoroughly impossible for our evolution ideas to be involved with any phenomena or their physical existence.

Carrying on a bit then will stop as it as this type of thinking would go on forever.
We might though also say that evolution caused the mouth to have a tongue in it. Just doesn’t make sense. If the word caused was taken away , we would still have to wonder why a tongue that can taste , happens to be in a mouth and can be wiggled to do what it does. No doubt , animals on other planets have mouths with tongues. We could though conjecture that the tongue in the mouth of an animal on another planet also evolved , but that would mean that the tongue in a mouth on another planet was always going to be a tongue in a mouth before it existed.
A tongue that can become a tongue on planets all over the universe surely wouldn’t be using our evolution ideas of random mutations and natural selection to be a tongue in a mouth. It would mean that evolution has foresight and that a tongue in a mouth was being slowly evolved from a non tongue into a tongue. Makes no sense. How would the same process exist all over the universe. More likely is that tongues and the mouths that they sit in with a set of teeth is in someway a given. How. No idea. But the imaginary idea of evolution surely wouldn’t be involved with that sort of setup that also includes tonsils and the throat that swallows the chewed up food food to go to the belly.

I can’t quite convey what i think a phenomena is. But say that males and females don’t exist. Then we try and think of a way to make babies and we want them to look different from each other. How would we come up with the idea of having males and females when they have never existed before and turn that idea into a physical reality. That’s as best as i can think of a phenomena. Problem is that we do have a thinking ability to ponder it , but only with the knowledge that males and females already exist.

If we imagine that only our thinking exists we wouldn’t come up with any phenomena at all. Our thinking , as it is today in our heads or wherever , can only observe and conjecture about the phenomena that we perceive. Science fiction writers have a go to get beyond it and come up with new ones , but their new phenomena are always based on the already existing ones. Artificial intelligence (AI) too , is also never going to come up with a new phenomena.

There could be gazillions of phenomena in the universe that we don’t know about in the same way as there are different animals on earth.

It would then follow that there would the be the phenomena of phenomenas and so on. Of course everything is a phenomena including the leaf on a tree or the clotting of blood in a wound. But lets say that a tree was always going to be a tree before it ever existed. That would mean that the phenomena of the tree existed before the tree and it would follow that all other phenomena existed before themselves too. A phenomena that can come to be physical , surely wouldn’t then allow our idea of random mutations and natural selection to take over.

It’s very hard to think that in a seed like say the acorn , that it has in it , all the properties to grow into an oak tree. Maybe it does. After all , once it gets water , sun and soil it starts to grow. But is it possible that it’s phenomena is still there too. It’s phenomena , that for simple thinking purposes is just the idea of it , could still be there.
We ourselves couldn’t come up with the idea of a tree if a tree had never existed , so we can call it a phenomena. We can’t see or feel or sense what the phenomena is , but in some way it could exist , and in some way it must exist because the tree comes to be.
Could we tap into how or what a phenomena is. Will our thought ever get to knowing. Perhaps we just havn’t got a sense that can sense the phenomena. No idea. Could there be a reason for us not having a sense to perceive the phenomena.
If there is a reason , then it might be nothing more than that there is no need for us to know about our position. Just a case of be born , eat , make some babies , and then die. Lovely. At least though we do have the sense that we don’t know.

If we were though to look at the deceased deer and imagine that it’s phenomena within the physical body has gone , then we could look at a living deer and imagine that the phenomena of the deer is moving the physical deer. That could be done for any living animal including us. We can look directly at another moving animal and consider that all of it’s physicality’s are being moved by the phenomena within it.
It’s not that it would mean anything substantial , but it couldn’t be ruled out that the physicality’s would not move without the phenomena.

It doesn’t seem that it could be the other way around. It couldn’t be that atoms and molecules evolved into a tree or a heart or a pair of lungs and that we now call them phenomenas. Trees and hearts and pairs of lungs were never anything less then their whole structure. It’s not clear in Google searches on evolution theory as to whether or not these body parts and trees are thought to of somehow existed , and then natural selection was involved after their appearing , or if the body parts and the whole animal evolved from some sort of ingredients that relied on natural selection from before they were whole parts or whole animals. What seems clear though , is that tongues and toe nails themselves don’t need any help from evolution. One wrong step by our evolution idea and we could all have one leg longer than the other , and sooner or later all the trees on earth would just fall down.

Freepik.com

It might be put that natural selection selects the bodies that have legs of equal length and those that had different leg lengths weren’t as successful. Quite obviously though , to use that kind of thinking would only mean that the thinker is trying to use language to back up the idea that the two legs being the same length exist that way because of natural selection. Surely though , two legs that exist in the first place and have feet at the end with toes and toe nails wouldn’t rely on evolution to make them the same length. If one leg was just an inch shorter than the other leg , our body would have a slight lean all of the time. Just that difference would make movement altogether different. Make it two inches difference and we’d all be hobbling left and right. Obviously , our two legs have to be the same length and they are the same length.

We might think that the two legs are copies of each other and grow together at the same time and that would make some sense and is probably in some sort of way correct. But then , when we consider that the toes on the two feet are the opposite way around to each other , that would mean that its not just a simple copying thing. Obviously , having a pair of feet with toes that are structured the opposite way to each other makes walking and balance precise. Try leaning forward to feel the toes pressing down to stop us falling forward. The toes seem ready to do their action at the moment we lean forward and there is no conscious thought from us that makes the toes press down , especially the big toes. Without those toes we would just fall forward. It is only possible to consciously not use the toes by telling ourselves that we are going to use the hands and arms to stop a complete fall.

It just doesn’t seem that the idea of evolution , using random mutations and natural selection has anything to do with coming up with that different setup of the feet being the opposites of each other and the toes stopping us from falling over. If that was all that we had to puzzle over , and we know about nothing else , we wouldn’t say that evolution allowed that to happen. We might look for some fossils to show how the feet come to be , and would soon realize that feet have always been joined to the end of legs.

We can conjecture that our feet once grasped tree branches to climb trees , but we would still have to explain the existence of the feet and their abilities. It doesn’t feel like there was once a pair of feet that became more tuned to the environment using evolution since feet and toes and eyes and blood and milk were good from the start. All of those things could use whatever they used in the first place to change , if they ever did.

An easier pair of features to look at are our hands at the end of our arms, as we can twist them around. Hands with fingers , like feet with toes , also seem to be setup in an opposite way. When we look at what we would think of as the top of hands with fingers going upwards with the nails facing us , they are clearly opposites of each other. When we turn them over to the palm side they still look like opposites. But when we put each hands finger tips to each hands finger tips , they look less like opposites. That thinking though means we have the thinking ability to think about it. The fingers are at the end of two separate hands but when we keep the finger tips together and turn the hands so that the thumbs are above the other fingers , we think of the thumbs as being higher than the other fingers. If we didn’t know about right and left we might think that they are the same.

Maybe going from left to right or from right to left is a perception much like going up or down on a round planet. There is no real up or down and so there is no real left or right. That’s not likely to go anywhere at the moment as I can’t quite grasp the thought.

But , just like the hands and the feet , the ears on the side of our head are physically shaped opposite to each other as well. There is a bit of a problem with looking in the mirror at our ears and it can get a bit complicated because the mirror reflection shows us the wrong way round. The mirror shows our left ear on the right side of the head and the right ear on the left side of the head. So to see the difference between the two ears , rather than chopping them off , we can take a picture of each and see that they are back to front of each other or even inside out. Does evolution do that. Obviously it doesn’t.

Evolution is our idea. So , just keeping with the evolution thing , surely evolution has nothing to to with the feet and the toes and the hands and the fingers and the two ears being opposites of each other. Since those body parts can be opposites of each other , why would any whole animal or plant rely on our evolution ideas of random mutations and natural selection to be successful in it’s future when the hands and feet and ears can have those differences. I suppose it’s all silly thinking really as we don’t know how even an ear or finger or toe exists, never mind their opposites. But the word evolution does sit in our thoughts as a real thing , and we feel that it has something to do with the existence and future of those fingers and toes and ears.

It begs two questions. First would be , does our evolution theory have anything to do with the actual existence of body parts and the phenomena of them. Second would be , does our evolution theory have anything to do with the organisation of those body parts. The answer to both of them could not be yes.

Anyway , carrying on with thinking abought just body parts , it would of course go on and on. Milk and blood also surely don’t exist because of our evolution conjectures. We don’t know how good our thinking is , but in the thinking that we have , we do know that to say that blood and milk evolved is non sensical. They are necessary and wouldn’t rely on the evolution ideas that we have. We just wouldn’t say that evolution has anything to do with the existence of milk and blood. We can try and say that the milk and blood evolved from something else , but we would still have to say that the earlier substances were also caused by evolution. If there is anything that evolves into anything else it would need explaining first. And if there was ever a first substance, that substance would surely not be allowing random mutations and natural selection to have anything to do with it’s future of turning into blood or milk.

Finally for this pretty long page , there are asteroids in space that have been shown recently (Bennu asteroid 2025) to have in them lots of the chemical compounds of life. The compounds are described as being the building blocks of life. We are left with the thought that asteroids crashed onto earth and deposited their organic compounds and that the compounds somehow evolved into all the forms of life including legs with feet and toes with toe nails.
Equally as possible in the world of conjecture , would be that the unphysical phenomena of animals would now use the available compounds to become physical. That feels more likely , because compounds and chemicals on their own don’t assemble themselves to bring about males and females or tongues and teeth or toe nails or a ducks webbed feet or milk and blood.
Before the idea of asteroids bringing along the compounds for life , there was , and still is , the idea that hot underwater vents in the sea provided the perfect conditions for minerals and compounds to come together to bring about the first life. Same idea again.
But never mind just the animal parts and substances , it’s hard to think that the asteroids or hot water vents had the potential to bring about memory and pain and animals fancying each other. Our evolution idea would surely have to have all of these things in place to have something to work on.

Wikimedia commons pic by RedGazelle123

By the way , I haven’t got a bee in my bonnet about all of this. It’s just a nice little thing to think about for five minutes now and then. I watch a nature programme pretty much like anyone else and just think crikey. However , maybe have become a bit sensitive to being informed that an animal like the anteater (above) , evolved a two feet long sticky tongue to get inside ant nests. Aside from the idea that it evolved the tongue , the anteater also doesn’t eat all the ants in a single nest. It moves on to another ant nest to allow more ants to come about in all the nests that it has already eaten from. Bees also move from flower head to flower head to get nectar. Maybe the bees are doing the same thing by allowing more nectar to come about. Don’t know. Anyway , then there is a Mr and Mrs anteater who fancy each other , and that between them have all sorts of different bits and pieces that can make a baby and have four legs that seem to have the best lengths to walk around. It seems more of a given common theme that animals have these things and that our evolution ideas have nothing to do with their existence or future.

Next page

Home

Location

123 Example Street

San Francisco, CA 12345

Designed with WordPress