Evolution question.

[SipahSalar]

My question is this if the asteroid didnt hit earth and nothing else happened could reptiles/dinosaurs of developed into life comparable to the human?

No, humans are the exception and not the norm. How many mammals do you know that possess intelligence? Zero. Its just us humans. So its safe to assume that given time, life DOES NOT progress to intelligence. There are species of animals much older than humans (crocodiles, alot of reptiles) and none of them has shown signs of intelligence so far.

With evolution, technically anything is possible in time since evolution occurs mostly by chance (the chance being of extremely low odds, i.e. positive mutation). Based on this, there is no actual way of predicting what would or wouldn't have happened had the asteroid not struck.

The answer to your question is: YES

Again, that's a very big and blind assumption considering no other species has shown intelligence.

 

[Sneaker]

No, humans are the exception and not the norm. How many mammals do you know that possess intelligence? Zero. Its just us humans. So its safe to assume that given time, life DOES NOT progress to intelligence. There are species of animals much older than humans (crocodiles, alot of reptiles) and none of them has shown signs of intelligence so far.



Again, that's a very big and blind assumption considering no other species has shown intelligence.

All of them? None of the species are older than other.. all evolved for the same time, just took different paths..

 

[SipahSalar]

All of them? None of the species are older than other.. all evolved for the same time, just took different paths..

Some had been there long before the others. Natural History.

 

[Sneaker]

Some had been there long before the others. Natural History.

Try to understand what I said, all species evolved for the same length of time...

 

[SipahSalar]

If we are in year 10, and men came in year 7, and reptiles in year 3. How did we evolve for the same length of time? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you.

 

[Sneaker]

If we are in year 10, and men came in year 7, and reptiles in year 3. How did we evolve for the same length of time? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you.

So all had evolution of 10 years since everything came form common single cell organisms..(assuming year 1 is where abiogenesis took place)

 

[SipahSalar]

So all had evolution of 10 years since everything came form common single cell organisms..(assuming year 1 is where abiogenesis took place)

No, that first organism (assuming life starting from one organism, which i do not agree with ) was a separate species. Evolution progressed in parallel for different species.

 

[Sneaker]

No, that first organism (assuming life starting from one organism, which i do not agree with ) was a separate species. Evolution progressed in parallel for different species.

LOL... you can never get this.. leave it.. not your cup of tea...
PS: last attempt, a species never evolves and still be same species. It either evolves from another or evolves into another. So when it is said "human evolution", it doesn't mean evolution within present humans (homo sapiens) but it is about how humans evolved from earlier species. Since every species evolved into present form from same single celled organisms, all present day species have evolved over same time period. It may be that crocodile took less steps to reach current form than humans, but there is no difference in time.

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

This is interesting.

 

[SipahSalar]

LOL... you can never get this.. leave it.. not your cup of tea...
PS: last attempt, a species never evolves and still be same species. It either evolves from another or evolves into another. So when it is said "human evolution", it doesn't mean evolution within present humans (homo sapiens) but it is about how humans evolved from earlier species. Since every species evolved into present form from same single celled organisms, all present day species have evolved over same time period. It may be that crocodile took less steps to reach current form than humans, but there is no difference in time.

There is no need to be condescending. Your whole assumption, as i mentioned before, is based on the fact that all life started from one singular organism, take that away and the theory collapses.

Secondly, you clearly cannot differentiate between macro and micro evolution. It is possible you do not even know of them, since probably everything you know about evolution comes from high school or National Geographic.

 

[oFFbEAT]

I've always wondered why cockroaches(said to have existed millions of years before humans and still exist) didn't become more intelligent than humans......

why/how a particular group of primates became intelligent(self aware)?

 

[Sneaker]

There is no need to be condescending. Your whole assumption, as i mentioned before, is based on the fact that all life started from one singular organism, take that away and the theory collapses.

Secondly, you clearly cannot differentiate between macro and micro evolution. It is possible you do not even know of them, since probably everything you know about evolution comes from high school or National Geographic.

No assumption, but fact. You can't take away facts and expect scientific theories to survive. So yes, you are right in this regards, same way if you take out the fact that earth revolves around sun, theory of gravity collapses. There is no difference between macro and micro evolution (except time scale). It is like you can take one step 1000 times but can not take 1000 steps. It is not my knowledge that comes from 5th grade textbook, but yours certainly come from certain "websites".

I've always wondered why cockroaches(said to have existed millions of years before humans and still exist) didn't become more intelligent than humans......

why/how a particular group of primates became intelligent(self aware)?

Because there was no need for them to. That is, they evolved to survive to many conditions that exists so perfectly that there is not "natural selection" that is acting on them. Since evolution is all about survival, they don't need to change. Also, evolution doesn't "aim" to make successive species intelligent, so if tomorrow there is another comet strike, "most intelligent" species will be wiped out but cockroaches will survive.. as they did last time...

 

[SipahSalar]

No assumption, but fact. You can't take away facts and expect scientific theories to survive. So yes, you are right in this regards, same way if you take out the fact that earth revolves around sun, theory of gravity collapses. There is no difference between macro and micro evolution (except time scale). It is like you can take one step 1000 times but can not take 1000 steps. It is not my knowledge that comes from 5th grade textbook, but yours certainly come from certain "websites".

Ok back your "fact" with scientifically proven evidence. Unless in your dictionary "fact" means whatever misconceptions you claim to be true.
Again, there is a lot of difference between macro and micro evolution. I mentioned it since you came up with this rubbish:

a species never evolves and still be same species.

So you are wrong by oversimplifying it to a difference in time scale. It will hep if you actually read something about it.

I've always wondered why cockroaches(said to have existed millions of years before humans and still exist) didn't become more intelligent than humans......

why/how a particular group of primates became intelligent(self aware)?

Time period seems to have no effect on a species intelligence, this applies universally, again humans are the exception and not the norm.

 

[Sneaker]

Ok back your "fact" with scientifically proven evidence. Unless in your dictionary "fact" means whatever misconceptions you claim to be true.
Again, there is a lot of difference between macro and micro evolution. I mentioned it since you came up with this rubbish:

So you are wrong by oversimplifying it to a difference in time scale. It will hep if you actually read something about it.


Time period seems to have no effect on a species intelligence, this applies universally, again humans are the exception and not the norm.

What kind of "scientific proof" are you looking for facts? You have any facts to prove multi-cellular organisms came before single celled ones? Sorry to say but some creationist rand about micro and macro evolution doesn't count. If you had any remote knowledge of the subject, you would have known that the only difference between them is time. What do you mean time doesn't have species' intelligence? How humans are exception? Do you think only humans have intelligence and other animals don't?

 

[SipahSalar]

What kind of "scientific proof" are you looking for facts? You have any facts to prove multi-cellular organisms came before single celled ones? Sorry to say but some creationist rand about micro and macro evolution doesn't count. If you had any remote knowledge of the subject, you would have known that the only difference between them is time. What do you mean time doesn't have species' intelligence? How humans are exception? Do you think only humans have intelligence and other animals don't?

As suspected, you didn't provide anything to back up your so-called "fact", just comedic counter questions.