Thinking evolution is still worth thinking about but only as a tool. Page 1 of 2

Despite thinking that random mutations and natural selection are futile explanations involved in any evolution idea , there is still no reason not to consider the idea of evolution. It’s like a footing on how to think and compare ideas. Or even just to use it to ponder about the below. Yes , the evidence to prove evolution with fossils and DNA is scant. It’s all pure conjecture , and then that eagerness to use that evidence leads to books and museum drawings of land animals turning into say whales in the ocean. And for our case we see images of apes or monkey legs gradually standing more and more upright and then the image of us in modern clothing staring at our smart phones. So yes , having a think about the idea that animals evolved , shows how easy it is for us to spend over one hundred and fifty years looking for evidence to back up a conjecture that ignores say what being able to taste food actually is , and why two spiders fancy each other. We have absolutely nothing to go on so we invent this evolution idea of physical bodies relying on random mutations and natural selection.

This one next though is always the stopper of thought because it is impossible to even come up with questions about it… “Which came first, the chicken or the egg.” For our thinking this is the crux of the matter. The egg would have to have had a male and female chicken to make it. That would mean that the question changes to “which came first, the male and female chickens or the egg”. If the egg came first It would be most likely be eaten by another animal in minutes. But if the egg did hatch , then the chicken born would would have to have that fancying thing and be looking for a partner to make more chickens. Therefore there must have been loads of chickens and eggs at the same time. If it was that the egg came first , then two eggs would have to be made in two separate occasions at the same time to ensure that one was male and the other one female. So that doesn’t make sense and it increases the need for impossible possibilities like the male chicken egg living near a female chicken egg at the same time.

There cannot have been a single chicken or single egg. Not going to come up with E=MC squared here. Just the thought that to think of evolution might help, but without the random mutation and natural selection bit , and still thinking on the spot that a chicken was and always will be a chicken. Very tricky. No idea. Who came up with the chicken and egg thing. It was a good one. A very good one. Just as difficult to work out which came first , a human baby or a mum and dad that made it. So far we are resting on evolution thoughts to aid us to working out all of the above.

Am trying hard as have no idea. But , same could be asked if we look at a face. Instinctively we would think that all the features on any face came together at the same time. We sort of try to say that those eyes and ears and mouths with teeth in them came about because of evolution. This human invention of the evolution idea is somehow involved with those features as if the word evolution itself is special. You could think back and back in time to imagine about the whole face without certain senses and features but that would still leave the question of how did any new senses and features come to be on the face. Sort of like asking which came first , the eyes or the nose or the the mouth. More likely would be that the phenomenas make the physicalities. More conjecture of course.

But like the chicken and egg thing, there could only be a whole face and it would have to have all its features. One face would then have to like the face of another. Penguins like the faces of other penguins and giraffes like the faces of other giraffes. It’s easy to say that the ape or monkey or whatever evolved into a human, but it ignores how they themselves got there faces with eyes and ears in the first place. Since they can have a face with all those features then something like faces wouldn’t mess around with random mutations and natural selection.

Fictional .. Judge Judy .. ” Mr Darwin. Are you trying to say that you accept that you and me do have different bits and pieces , and that you don’t know how they came about , but after they came about , they evolved using random mutations and natural selection. “

Charles Darwin .. ” Erm “

I know , the above is maybe a bit silly and unfair as Charles Darwin is gone. Will change. But we do have to think about how we think about these things . On how it is that a female has a womb and a male doesn’t , Judge Judy would be right to question someone that says that animals evolve using natural selection and random mutations. Quite rightly would be the question of how the fossils show how evolution gives a female a womb but somehow doesn’t give the male one. Those fossils of course don’t actually exist. But evolution clearly has no involvement in the choosing of giving females a womb and not giving males one. It’s an absolute impossibility to think anything other than females have wombs and males don’t.

Also , our evolution theory only acts on something that already exists. It doesn’t bring about the atoms and molecules that make the animal bodies , so we might use instead the word ’cause’ and ask what causes the atoms and molecules to form the differences between male and females to exist. Clearly it is a specific thing, and evolution has nothing to do with it’s origin. That is , the phenomena or idea of male and female coming into existence would be more caused. Even that though is weak.

There is then in thinking on just the one phenomena of female wombs and then all other phenomenas existing in the first place and then , why would those phenomenas rely on something like a human invention saying that natural selection is used in a sort of way to allow them to continue. In logical thought , it would be that females have wombs to allow a baby to grow in. Quite how natural selection and random mutations and evolution has anything to do with that is obviously questionable. It would go on and on of course. We cant explain the phenomena of wombs just being in females. It just feels or seems like those different bits and pieces on males and females like the womb and all the different hormones don’t use evolution. The word evolution though sits solidly in our thoughts , and it sits there because it is difficult to disprove a conjecture like evolution. You’d have to disprove that a womb exists in only a woman and not a man because that scenario evolved.

Judge Judy on television says to the guests that “you have two eyes and ears for a reason.” A language expert would definitely make a better job than me at explaining how we use the word “reason” to explain how our eyes and ears exist so that we can see and hear. Our other choice of language is to say that the two eyes and two ears evolved to enable seeing and hearing and that they use the progression of natural selection acting on random mutations. So we have the phenomenas of the seeing and hearing and the phenomenas of the physical eyes and ears but we use different language to say how we perceive their existence.

Other language we use is to say that the physical eyes and ears have a purpose. The purposes would be that the eyes detect light and the ears detect sound waves and then after that they send those detections via links going to the brain. From the brain we don’t know of any links to anything else so we can only say in simple language without really knowing , that the brain produces the sight and sound that we or mind or consciousness or whatever experiences.

Sticking with the thinking that Judge Judy has , using reason for the existence of eyes and ears , then reason for all body parts would surely outweigh any evolutionary ideas. We could of course go on forever giving reason to toe nails , eyebrows , the senses , livers , and pancreases and flesh and blood etc. To say or think that they evolved seems so weak. Pretty sure that no fossils or DNA are going to get anywhere past Judge Judy’s summing up that eyes and ears and any of the other organs and body parts are there for a reason.

Using reason for the existence of the physical eyes and ears to see and hear is much more spectacular and succinct than the thoughts that the word evolution leaves in our thinking , especially as there is no evidence of eyes and ears or any arm or leg or organ ever having physically evolved. The reason for the existence of physical eyes and ears to see and hear feels absolutely above any other conjectures that we have come up with like evolution. The physical eyes and ears exist to somehow bring about seeing and hearing even though that doesn’t say anything about what seeing and hearing is.

It might be thought of as being a bit similar in a way to the chicken and the egg thing. When using the word ‘reason’ then the physical eyes and ears are there to enable us or any other animal to see and hear. If they are there for the reason to see and hear we would have to consider why physical eyes and ears had to evolve. If there is a reason for eyes and ears to exist to aid animals to see and hear , it wouldn’t rely on our theories of evolution to come up with physical eyes and ears. The word reason should be considered as as important as the word evolution when trying to think about the history of animals and plants and trees etc. More conjecture, but just as easy as our evolution ideas , is that animals , whatever they are , that want to exist on a planet , might go to a shop in the sky and choose the right parts to exist. A bit more on other planets later , but if there is another pair of ears on another planet , the shop with all sorts of ears is more likely than evolution making ears.

Next page

Home