Friday, May 05, 2006

Neat little gif on evolution





cvs said...


Ishwar said...

al, get laid.

I said...

IMO, the evolution of life should be studied at the bio-chemical level and then projected to the biological species level. Not the other way around.

In experiments with ecoli, it was always impossible to verify a 'forward' evolution at the species level.

Ishwar said...

I, I disagreee with you..

1. I don't find sentences 1 and 2 to be connected, unless you mean to say that evolution is being taught in a teleological sense, which I don't think is the case. If pea-brained people misinterpret evolution in a teleological sense, it's their problem, not evolution's.

2. Studying evolution at a biological species level instills in you a feeling of awe and curiosity that would do well when you get into the biochemical aspect of evolution.

3. WRT ecoli, evolution is never "forward". It's just plain adaptive.

Correct me if I'm wrong though!

I said...

By forward, I meant the xpected adaptive evolution.

And by studying, I meant research study. Species is too macrolevel to explain the micros of life.

Ishwar said...

Dude, are you doing research into evolution? Would love to catch up with you offline...

I said...

lol not really.

But what I meant was.. if we are to understand how life was formed and evolved to its current state, the theory of evolution as it is now, is inadequate.

Eg, with ecoli experiments, after its equivalent of a million years, it actually lost the ability to swim and to produce a vital rna sugar, when the conditions were carefully simulated to encourage the opposite behavior. It could have been adaptive for a reason we don't know yet. But it could not be confirmed one way or the other.

The answer would lie in bio-chemical dynamics. also the bridge between living and non-living, how random molecules called coacervates became the first living cell can't be explained by macroevolution.