User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Why our understanding of 'Survival of the Fittest' is wrong

  1. #1
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Why our understanding of 'Survival of the Fittest' is wrong

    Survival of the fittest has to do with ability to reproduce, not the biggest and strongest.

    See video at Why our understanding of 'Survival of the Fittest' is wrong.

    See also Why Birds Survived, and Dinosaurs Went Extinct, After an Asteroid Hit Earth

    Not that beaks guaranteed survival of the impact event. The duck-like bird Vegavis lived at the end of the Cretaceous and had a beak, yet there’s no indication that this avian survived. “Just having a beak was not enough,” Tucker says. Rather, it’s that birds with beaks and powerful gizzards capable of crushing tough seeds had an unexpected advantage that increased their chances of survival.
    ...and thus reproduce.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Calypso Jones (09-21-2020),Peter1469 (09-21-2020)

  3. #2
    Points: 62,451, Level: 61
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 1,999
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteranRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience Points
    Calypso Jones's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    26181
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    14,239
    Points
    62,451
    Level
    61
    Thanks Given
    5,075
    Thanked 10,860x in 6,374 Posts
    Mentioned
    109 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Might this 'duck like bird' be a DUCK?? Not criticizing you @Chris. I'm laughing at secular scientists who twist themselves into pretzels.

  4. #3
    Points: 62,451, Level: 61
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 1,999
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteranRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience Points
    Calypso Jones's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    26181
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    14,239
    Points
    62,451
    Level
    61
    Thanks Given
    5,075
    Thanked 10,860x in 6,374 Posts
    Mentioned
    109 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    if it lived at the end of the Cretaceous, what did it 'evolve' from?

  5. #4
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Calypso Jones View Post
    Might this 'duck like bird' be a DUCK?? Not criticizing you @Chris. I'm laughing at secular scientists who twist themselves into pretzels.
    Sorry, I don't understand the question.

    Or relevance to the topic.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  6. #5
    Points: 62,451, Level: 61
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 1,999
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteranRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience Points
    Calypso Jones's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    26181
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    14,239
    Points
    62,451
    Level
    61
    Thanks Given
    5,075
    Thanked 10,860x in 6,374 Posts
    Mentioned
    109 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In your excerpt from the article regarding the duck like bird. I don't have a problem with survival of the fittest being morphed into survival of the most prolific..yet. It seems to me that the fittest would be the best at reproducing.

    But i have to say also that i am not necessarily convinced that survival of the fittest is that thing called EVOLUTION. I would call it adaptation but not evolution a definition used by darwin and adopted by his supporters.

    about 15 or less years ago...some berkeley scientists came up with the idea of 'survival of the KINDEST'. I don't think that caught on either.

    I like these articles though.

  7. #6
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Calypso Jones View Post
    In your excerpt from the article regarding the duck like bird. I don't have a problem with survival of the fittest being morphed into survival of the most prolific..yet. It seems to me that the fittest would be the best at reproducing.

    But i have to say also that i am not necessarily convinced that survival of the fittest is that thing called EVOLUTION. I would call it adaptation but not evolution by the definition used by darwin and his supporters.

    about 15 or less years ago...some berkeley scientists came up with the idea of 'survival of the KINDEST'. I don't think that caught on either.

    I like these articles though.


    "survival of the fittest being morphed into survival of the most prolific" is not a morphing but a correction. Darwin didn't mean survival of the strongest. As you say "It seems to me that the fittest would be the best at reproducing."

    But i have to say also that i am not necessarily convinced that survival of the fittest is that thing called EVOLUTION. I would call it adaptation but not evolution by the definition used by darwin and his supporters.
    It is about that as well. But you need to combine adaptation with reproduction. That is, which adaptations survive. In the article about birds, their adaptation of beaks allowed them to reproduce and survive in a changed environment.


    about 15 or less years ago...some berkeley scientists came up with the idea of 'survival of the KINDEST'.
    Yea, there's a video on that but it's bunk. I mean, humans survived because they're able to cooperate better than other species. But it's not out of kindness.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (09-21-2020)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts