Learned and Adapted Behaviors

[Dan From Smithville]

Who is talking about one lion? Certainly not me.
So the change can happen then. Thank you.
That's all I am saying

See. Bias on speculation without evidence.

That change does occur is not evidence that the changes you propose can occur. There is not rational reason or evidence to consider this.

Changes in the evolution of microbes to utilize a new substrate is not evidence that lions will start eating apples.

 

[nPeace]

You'll have to expand on what you mean here. Do you consider the Bible to be a science book that explains evolution or discusses the change in species over time?

Please... that's not the topic for discussion here, and you don't want people questioning you on your beliefs, so don't question me.

 

[VoidCat]

I don't think so.



Why did you jump in in the first place, if you know little or nothing about the subject, and accuse someone of ignorance?
If you aren't versed enough to educate an ignorant person, something is wrong with your accusations... there aren't accurate.
What do you know about me?

Because I was confused what this thread was about cuz it's all over the place. I thought we were talking about lions and their digestive systems. They I know can't suddenly change to vegetarian.

 

[nPeace]

This isn't what you said. You compared a commonly observed phenomenon of eating to magical transformation of one living thing into another.

What you show here isn't an example of that magical transformation.

I cannot tell you what this is in terms I would like to, but what you are accusing me of is not the truth... and you are simply here to distract.
So once again, I have nothing to say to you.

 

[nPeace]

Because I was confused what this thread was about cuz it's all over the place. I thought we were talking about lions and their digestive systems. They I know can't suddenly change to vegetarian.

Suddenly change? What do you mean by suddenly change?
Does bacteria suddenly change to eating plastic?
Does drug resistance in bacteria happen suddenly?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I cannot tell you what this is in terms I would like to, but what you are accusing me of is not the truth... and you are simply here to distract.
So once again, I have nothing to say to you.

I see. Distract from what. I talking directly to what you claim. If you are correct, then show me and everyone else. If you can't do that, then say so. That would be the proper thing to do rather than try to blame me.

You claim you believe lions can change their eating habits. Then show us that they can switch from eating meat to eating fruit.

Describe what you mean by change and the scope within which it occurs.

Your failure to do that is not my fault.

Your failure to express any sort of reasoning in support of your claim is not fault.

Ignoring me is your choice and your decisions to action are your own. I do not control you and cannot accept responsibility for your decisions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Suddenly change? What do you mean by suddenly change?
Does bacteria suddenly change to eating plastic?
Does drug resistance in bacteria happen suddenly?

I think it would help if you explained the criteria of change that you mean. You are leaving your readers without enough information and then you get upset when they come to their own conclusions with the incomplete information they do have.

 

[Secret Chief]

Suddenly change? What do you mean by suddenly change?
Does bacteria suddenly change to eating plastic?
Does drug resistance in bacteria happen suddenly?

Lions, like all cats, are obligate carnivores. They will remain so until homo sapiens causes their extinction.

 

[VoidCat]

Suddenly change? What do you mean by suddenly change?
Does bacteria suddenly change to eating plastic?
Does drug resistance in bacteria happen suddenly?

Bacteria is not a mammal. They can change more rapidly they reproduce differently. And small changes do happen in mammals and other animals that are sudden. Such as a bear being a different colour then another bear or a cat being born polydactal rather then with the usual number of toes. It's just these small changes take a long time to add up to big changes. And when it comes to digestive systems it would be a big change. Lots of little changes would need to take place for it to occur. By the point it would get to a lion to eat plants regularly it likely wouldn't be a lion anymore.

 

[nPeace]

I think it would help if you explained the criteria of change that you mean. You are leaving your readers without enough information and then you get upset when they come to their own conclusions with the incomplete information they do have.

You. No. If it were someone else.
You accuse people of things you yourself do not like people accusing you of.
You do not ask, as you insist people do, in your case.
You stick with your view despite people telling you otherwise. You simply are interested, not in what people say, but in your attacking them because of how you feel about them. Fundamentalist cause that. Remember? I remember.
So no. You hate fundamentalist. I despise hypocrisy.

@Nimos knows what I mean about rapid change.... unless she has a short memory It was her I was having this conversation with in the past, and anyone is free to go through what I said, not in this thread alone, but previous.
I explained what I meant already.
You don't care, nor do you want to know.

Fill up the whole thread with your posts, if that makes you feel good.
Goodbye.

 

[nPeace]

Bacteria is not a mammal. They can change more rapidly they reproduce differently. And small changes do happen in mammals and other animals that are sudden. Such as a bear being a different colour then another bear or a cat being born polydactal rather then with the usual number of toes. It's just these small changes take a long time to add up to big changes. And when it comes to digestive systems it would be a big change. Lots of little changes would need to take place for it to occur. By the point it would get to a lion to eat plants regularly it likely wouldn't be a lion anymore.

Thank you.
So suddenly, does not mean instantaneous like POOF. Correct?
So when and where do these little changes start, and how?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Please... that's not the topic for discussion here, and you don't want people questioning you on your beliefs, so don't question me.

It is a valid question regarding the basis of your claims. It is a mischaracterization to consider it criticism of your beliefs.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You. No. If it were someone else.
You accuse people of things you yourself do not like people accusing you of.
You do not ask, as you insist people do, in your case.
You stick with your view despite people telling you otherwise. You simply are interested, not in what people say, but in your attacking them because of how you feel about them. Fundamentalist cause that. Remember? I remember.
So no. You hate fundamentalist. I despise hypocrites.

@Nimos knows what I mean about rapid change.... unless she has a short memory It was her I was having this conversation with in the past, and anyone is free to go through what I said, not in this thread alone, but previous.
I explained what I meant already.
You don't care, nor do you want to know.

Fill up the whole thread with your posts, if that makes you feel good.
Goodbye.

You are accusing me of things that I have not done.

I asked questions and point out the flaws in claims that some people make.

This just seems to be making it about me and besmirching me to avoid answering questions.

It was a topic posed in an open forum. Did you think that you would only get people that agree with you.

I don't particular care to be called a liar and a hypocrite. More so, since neither is true.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Thank you.
So suddenly, does not mean instantaneous like POOF. Correct?
So when and where do these little changes start, and how?

Why are you asking others to define what you mean by sudden or rapid?

Do you not think it is your responsibility to define the terms around which you make your claims?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You. No. If it were someone else.
You accuse people of things you yourself do not like people accusing you of.
You do not ask, as you insist people do, in your case.
You stick with your view despite people telling you otherwise. You simply are interested, not in what people say, but in your attacking them because of how you feel about them. Fundamentalist cause that. Remember? I remember.
So no. You hate fundamentalist. I despise hypocrites.

@Nimos knows what I mean about rapid change.... unless she has a short memory It was her I was having this conversation with in the past, and anyone is free to go through what I said, not in this thread alone, but previous.
I explained what I meant already.
You don't care, nor do you want to know.

Fill up the whole thread with your posts, if that makes you feel good.
Goodbye.

I don't hate fundamentalists. I disagree with that accusation.

People making claims that are outside the scope of their knowledge and using flawed and fallacious logic should be challenged.

Are you suggesting that people should just agree with anything you say?

 

[sayak83]

I was having a discussion with a number of atheists recently, on the ability of animals to adapt from being carnivorous to herbivorous, and vica versa.
It is widely believed that a carnivore, such as a lion, cannot become a herbivore. I argue strongly against that belief.

I came across this article, which says in part...
Hippos eat meat too, not just plants.
Scientists have been getting this wrong about hippopotamus for years.

This after observing hippos "surprising diet" (see video ...may be disturbing).
...scientists have recently begun to uncover some exceptional behaviors that may change our view of animals again, especially their seemingly limited diet.

I wonder what @Alien826 and @Nimos think about this, in relation to other animals, including lions.
Could it be, we don't know as much as we think we do, and might it be that animals learn behaviors, and can adapt to fit those behaviors?
Can rapid changes take place in the body, to allow for adjustments taking place in the brain as well?

It's not only possible to me, but logical, and I think this example proves that.

No. A lion cannot become a herbivore over a span of a few years no matter what you do.
Same for deer for herbivory.
Of course you can cook them the food..then anything works.

The case you noted is simply that there was new observation showing hippos sometimes eat meat when opportunity arises. They were always doing it, we simply observed it first in 1995 or so. Hippos eat mostly grass but complement it sometime with meat if they can get it.

 

[VoidCat]

Thank you.
So suddenly, does not mean instantaneous like POOF. Correct?
So when and where do these little changes start, and how?

With genetics. For example you inherit genes from both your mother and father. So your genetic make up would be different from theirs it would be a mix of theirs, and there also may be genetic mutations that may cause differences your parents don't got. I for instance was born with autism. That means my brain is wired differently then most folk. I inherited this from my mom's side of the family likely due to a mutation in the X chromosome. Somewhere along the line someone in the family developed with a genetic mutation that causes autism. Another family would not have these genetic changes. Over time changes to the genes will cause some adaptations that will have advantages so they will continue as those who carry those genes pass it on to their children. Other adaptations will not be an advantage and folk may die before passing on those genes. Little changes in genes over millions of years add up.

 

[nPeace]

With genetics. For example you inherit genes from both your mother and father. So your genetic make up would be different from theirs it would be a mix of theirs, and there also may be genetic mutations that may cause differences your parents don't got. I for instance was born with autism. That means my brain is wired differently then most folk. I inherited this from my mom's side of the family likely due to a mutation in the X chromosome. Somewhere along the line someone in the family developed with a genetic mutation that causes autism. Another family would not have these genetic changes. Over time changes to the genes carried some adaptations will have advantages so they will continue as those who carry those genes pass it on to their children. Other adaptations will not be an advantage and folk may die before passing on those genes. Little changes in genes over millions of years add up.

Millions of years is an assumption.
The fact is, the lions first have to start changing, before they can pass on anything to their offspring.
The fact is, the lions would remain lions, even when those changes are inherited.
Am I wrong so far?

 

[SkepticThinker]

You. No. If it were someone else.
You accuse people of things you yourself do not like people accusing you of.
You do not ask, as you insist people do, in your case.
You stick with your view despite people telling you otherwise. You simply are interested, not in what people say, but in your attacking them because of how you feel about them. Fundamentalist cause that. Remember? I remember.
So no. You hate fundamentalist. I despise hypocrisy.

@Nimos knows what I mean about rapid change.... unless she has a short memory It was her I was having this conversation with in the past, and anyone is free to go through what I said, not in this thread alone, but previous.
I explained what I meant already.
You don't care, nor do you want to know.

Fill up the whole thread with your posts, if that makes you feel good.
Goodbye.

That poster asked you a sincere question.

I think it would help if you explained the criteria of change that you mean. You are leaving your readers without enough information and then you get upset when they come to their own conclusions with the incomplete information they do have.

And in your response, instead of answering that question, you launched into this personal attack.
That's after you've accused me and everyone else of insincerity.
Well, I submit that thou doth project too much and that this thread is a waste of time.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

I think what you're describing is evolution.

I mean, there's nothing stopping a lion from eating a plant, or a hippo from eating another animal. Things change. They evolve. New ways of living become standard eventually. If an atheist argues this can't happen, you should remind them that they probably do in some degree believe in evolution.

No. That is not evolution. It is adaptation....which is not the same.
Change is NOT adaptation or evolution.
Adaptation is NOT evolution or change.
Evolution is NOT change or adaptation.
Those three terms are absolutely NOT interchangeable.
Keep reading below for more on this....

So you are saying that a lion would rather starve to death, than eat anything other than vegetation.
If that's what you believe...


A true experiment would be to have lions starving, with nothing but that fruit or whatever else around... Just make sure the man isn't around... no vegetation either.
Then see what happens.


I always believed in evolution / adaptation.
Word games are what evolutionist play.
All Christians, Muslims, etc. believe in change - another word for evolution. We evolve every day.
I don't believe in the theory of evolution.
There is a difference, I hope you know.

It is not word play.
In terms of describing animals (or even plants, bacteria, fungi, etc...).....

Change is just change, and covers a massive slew or various topics, and is pretty much pointless to discuss here.

Adaptation is what one animal does, within the space of its own one lifetime, to alter it's own behavior for improved life and/or life expectancy. NOTE: Adaptation may also include variation of gene expression within one organism, within it's own one lifetime, but not a genetic change.

Evolution occurs over more than one generation and results in a change in the genome. This requires two components in this order (First - A genetic mutation, and Second - a biological stressor). A genetic variation occurs in one or more offspring of an organism simply by chance (or even by some mutagen effecting the gametes of the parent(s)), and then the offspring are subjected to a biological stressor.
Those offspring (the 2nd generation) who are capable of reproduction get a chance to pass along the new genetic variation, thus making the "mutation" more and more the standard for the survivors of the biological stressor, and are thus "evolved" to their environment better than offspring who don't get the genetic variation.
Continued below......

Suddenly change? What do you mean by suddenly change?
Does bacteria suddenly change to eating plastic?
Does drug resistance in bacteria happen suddenly?

So, no. For such bacterial feats of evolution, you have to consider VERY LARGE NUMBERS. E. coli bacterial colonies reproduce by mitosis, once every 20 minutes in optimal conditions. So. 1 bacterium becomes 2 in 20 minutes. In one hour there are 8 bacteria (2 ^3 because you had 3 reproduction cycles which double the population each cycle). Therefore, in one day (24 hours = 72 twenty minute reproduction cycles) a single bacterium has turned into 2 ^72 bacteria. That's 47,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 bacteria from one momma . a.k.a. 47 sextillion bacteria.

DNA is copied pretty accurately, but on a rare occasion, an error is made in the copying process. Such an error is called a mutation. Most bacterial mutations are lethal, so all of that "daughter's" lineage never even happen. Thus at the end of 24 hours, we have less than 47 sextillion.
Supposing (purely hypothetically) that many lethal mutations occurred, along with several non-lethal ones. One of these non-lethal mutations makes the offspring glow purple, one that makes offspring glow green, one that lets the offspring eat plastic, and one that provides the offspring with immunity to penicillin) and at the end of the day, we have a total of 47 Quintillion bacteria. To simplify things, we'll also suppose that any one of these mutations cancels the bacteria from having offspring with any of the other mutations (yes sometimes that happens). But mutations are rare, so most of the bugs (bacteria) are just like great-great-great grandma the original.
Now we need that biological stressor.

So we take the small teaspoonful of bacteria and drop them into a soup of water with very little food, but lots of plastic. The stressor is that those who cannot digest plastic for energy.....DIE.
One day later, we have a population of E. coli bacteria for whom 99.999% are able to eat plastic (thank you very much random chance mutation + stressor = evolution). No green glowers, no purple glowers, no penicillin resistant daughters, and no daughters who are just like great-great-great grandma.

Note that the ones who could resist penicillin are now all dead. The stressor they faced had nothing to do with antibiotics. It was about getting nutrients from plastic vs starvation.
If the stressor was that they were trying to make an abscess and septic infection inside a human who was taking penicillin, then that's a different biological stressor, and only the penicillin resistant daughters would have survived to the end of the day. No plastic eaters.
If there had been daughters who were resistant to vancomycin (a different group of antibiotics) they would have died out too. Since in the environment I listed above, the stressor was Penicillin, not vancomycin.

So evolution occurs from generation to generation, with genetic mutations (most of which are lethal), combined with biological stressors in the environment that kill off those who were not simply lucky enough to have been born with the right genome.
Also, bacteria have VERY simplistic genomes and biological systems compare to multicellular animals, wherein a mutation in one system often has to be accompanied by mutations in other systems or else the offspring dies. For example, being able to functionally chew and degrade grass cellulose in grass cells with grinding teeth and longer/slower gullet, as well as biochemically converting cellulose to glucose inside the intestinal epithelial cells. One without the other won't convert a carnivore to an herbivore. And of course (thankfully) lions don't reproduce themselves by mitosis every 20 minutes. So if we were to actually see inter-generation changes (evolution) in lions, we couldn't do it with a couple of weeks work in a lab, but it would take hundreds of thousands or millions of years in the wild.

Lastly, with enough mutations to a genome of any organism, it will eventually be no longer capable of reproducing with its EXTREMELY distant cousins of the same generation. And THAT is when we would consider them to be of two different species. They started with the same great-great ancestor, but enough change in the genome makes the gametes (egg and sperm) from connecting to one another to make a living offspring.
In this way, we are VERY DISTANT cousins of the other great apes. There was one great-great-great-.....grandma great "ape"; and over the many millennia, there were many mutations and stressors our ancestors (and off-branched relatives) were pitted against; leading to differentiation based upon survival for those environments.....so that gorillas, and baboons, and humans, and chimpanzees, and etc....etc...etc....other 'great apes' are what remain.