1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Sexual selection and evolution - not so random

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Wild Fox, Aug 8, 2020.

  1. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,245
    Ratings:
    +1,778
    Religion:
    nature
    Sexual selection – non-random evolution

    Evolution theory is too often presented as a simplistic random mutation followed by natural selection where only the fittest survive conjuring the image of the strongest, best hidden, fastest, or other best characteristic for pure survival. Sexual selection as seen in birds gives a much different view. Yes, there are still mutations that at random can create new characteristics that can be exploited but the selection pressure would seem to be often in direct opposition of the image of survival of the “fittest”.

    Ironically this was recognized by Darwin himself.

    “I can see no good reason to doubt that female birds, by selecting, during thousands of generations, the most melodious or beautiful males, according to their standard of beauty, might produce a marked effect.” From the Origin of Species.

    He who admits the principle of sexual selection will be led to the remarkable conclusion that the cerebral system not only regulates most of the existing functions of the body, but has indirectly influenced progressive development of various bodily structures and of certain mental qualities. Courage, pugnacity, perseverance, strength and size of body, weapons of all kinds, musical organs, both vocal and instrumental, bright colours, stripes, and marks, and ornamental appendages, have all been indirectly gained by one sex or the other, through the influence of love and jealousy, through the appreciation of the beautiful in sound, colour, or form, and through the exertion of choice; and these powers of the mind manifestly depend on the development of the cerebral system” from the Descent of man

    This form of selection has created amazing evolutionary changes in the male that appear can only be seen as placing them at a greater risk for predation with no advantage in helping with acquiring food and contrary the common view of natural selection.


    Ironically during this time there was opposition to Darwin’s view of natural selection. George Wallace (who proposed evolution about the same time as Darwin) was against Darwin’s views of sexual selection in reference to coloration, ornamentation and behavioral pattern arguing that they did not represent a selection process but rather . (1889 book, Darwinism): "The enormously lengthened plumes of the birds of paradise and the peacock... have been developed to so great an extent [because] there is a surplus of strength, vitality and growth-power which is able to expand itself in this way without injury." “…the unselected side effects of an exuberant animal physiology that has a natural predilection for bright colors and loud song”

    Kaar Groos also objected that the female could not have anything to do with male attributes. “This thought at once throws light on the peculiar hereditary arts of courtship, especially on the indulgence in flying, dancing, or singing by a whole flock at once. But the hindrance to the sexual function that is most efficacious, though hitherto unappreciated, is the instinctive coyness of the female. This it is that necessitates all the arts of courtship, and the probability is that seldom or never does the female exert any choice. She is not awarder of the prize, but rather a hunted creature. So, just as the beast of prey has special instincts for finding his prey, the ardent male must have special instincts for subduing feminine reluctance….”

    Thankfully these views of male dominance in our societies are finally dying out and the recognition animals have complex cognitive abilities not so different from humans that allows for sexual selection.

    And thus you have the birds of paradise project from the Cornell Ornithology laboratory.

     
    • Like Like x 8
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    1,996
    Ratings:
    +886
    Religion:
    none
    It may be worth noting that the phrase "survival of the fittest" didn't even originate in Darwin's writing, but from Herbert Spencer, one of the early supporters of the theory of evolution and an early Social Darwinist.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
  3. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    15,433
    Ratings:
    +7,214
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Yes, natiral evolution is not so random.

    I believe 'survival of the fittest' was described by Charles Darwin, as 'natural selection.' Coining the phrase, and the misuse of the concept of ]survival of the fittest' is not evoluton. Social Darwinism is not a natural evolution it is an artificial selection by unnatural methods.

    In reality the only thing that is truely random is the timing od the occurance cause and effectof mutatons. The mechanisms of evolution beyond this arenot random. They are determined by the natural laws, natural environment, and chemical and organic chemical determined processes. There is of course a range of possible outcomes of events in nature, but the outcomes are limited by natural processes, and the environment.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    @Wild Fox...I want to thank you for posting that video.....I enjoyed it very much.
    But I couldn't help but notice that the evolutionary biologist made the statements...."why?"...."how did that happen?"...."how did that come to be?"..."how did these birds of paradise come to be?"

    Does somebody confident about the subjects of their chosen field make comments like that? He clearly doesn't know. These birds throw the theory of evolution under the bus IMO.

    It speaks of these birds being "living textbooks on evolution".....but seriously, they have no clue as to how these birds came to exist, or even how they got into that habitat because they are found nowhere else on earth. A bit like Australia's monotremes......they are a mystery to evolutionists....but not to those who believe in creation.

    I don't believe that evolution had anything to do with them personally.....they are to me, clearly the work of a talented artisan...not the product of blind evolutionary forces.....[​IMG]

    How do birds create iridescence on their plumage? What is iridescence? It is described as..."an object's physical structure that causes light waves to combine with one another, a phenomenon known as interference. In constructive interference, light waves combine so that the crests and troughs line up to reinforce each other, increasing the vibrancy of the reflected color."...can this happen by accident? Who taught these birds about light refraction?

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    No one is going to tell me that these are flukes of nature......
     
    #4 Deeje, Aug 9, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Ratings:
    +9,841
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    Is that only in birds or in sea creatures also. Perhaps reading this would help: Structural coloration - Wikipedia
    In Animals too - Cape Golden Mole. To some extent in Humans too, when some hair on head or body seem to shine differently in light.
    Wallin, Margareta (2002). "Nature's Palette: How animals, including humans, produce colours" (PDF). Bioscience Explained. 1 (2): 1–12. Retrieved November 17, 2011.
    Basically, you need to read something other than scriptures too to know all this.

    [​IMG] Cape Golden Mole
     
    #5 Aupmanyav, Aug 9, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2020
  6. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Iridescence is also found in other creatures...

    [​IMG][​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    More flukes?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Brian2

    Brian2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    746
    Ratings:
    +91
    Religion:
    Christian
    A talented artisan could and has design the whole system of adaptation of life to the environment. This system could have taken life on the journey of evolution with the input of the designer along to way to bring things to the place He had planned.
     
  8. Brian2

    Brian2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    746
    Ratings:
    +91
    Religion:
    Christian
    With limited outcomes and some outcomes better than others it seem to me that this also could limit the randomness of the whole process and mean that there could have been a preplanned destination for where life on earth ended up if the process was designed initially.
     
  9. Mock Turtle

    Mock Turtle Asinine, socialist-leaning, puerile filth
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2018
    Messages:
    6,382
    Ratings:
    +2,902
    Religion:
    The one we are born with; therefore being none.
    Not going to mention all the parasites and predators then? God has created such beauty to have them infested and predated on - for amusement? And why just one sex, that is, in most bird species it is the male that has the plumage and the singing? Was God biased?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    1,996
    Ratings:
    +886
    Religion:
    none
    That's fair to hold as a personal belief, but as a philosophical foundation for doing science, I would find it self defeating.
    "God did it" is not only a very minimal explanation (as it does not actually explain the 'how', or even the 'why', only 'who is responsible?') it also serves as a poor foundation for further research.

    By comparison, "we don't know how this happened, but we know that elements X, Y, and Z must have played a role" actually motivates people to conduct further research to get to the bottom of it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    15,433
    Ratings:
    +7,214
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    No chance of preplaned, randomness limited by definitin, and no design except for the constrants of natural laws, natural processes and the environmental iinfluence. Of course, there is varitation in the limited outcomes of every cause and effect event, but the overall process is naturally determined just like all of our physical existence.
     
  12. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    15,433
    Ratings:
    +7,214
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Yrs, could have, but there is more than sufficuent evidence that our physical existence can come about naturally.

    I do believe in God, and Creation by natural methods, but that is a belief in faith.
     
  13. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    On the contrary...it is a springboard into exploration of all those things. How things work is the motivator behind scientific study. Those who accept creation do not reject true science...they are inspired by it....but dubious of theoretical science, which to us is not science at all, but just a lame excuse to eliminate the need to believe in a Creator. The benefit of that is you are not accountable to anyone but yourself.....that is appealing to many.

    How living things got here is something science is still trying to figure out. No one was there to document these things except the Creator, but unbelievers can't accept his simple explanation of how life originated, so they fill in the blanks with supposition, conjecture and absolute guesswork. The Bible does not pretend to be a science textbook, but when it touches on matters of science, it is very accurate. It tells us that the earth is round....that it hangs in space...that the moon is a subtle night light to offset the sunlight by day.....it speaks about precipitation and evaporation.....science already knows about these things but the Bible recorded them thousands of years ago.

    I believe that God gave us a brain with a huge capacity for knowledge and a strong desire to learn about the world around us. The subject matter becomes endless when you consider that some scientists devote their whole lives to the study of one taxonomic family of creatures....like the birds of paradise in the video. Think of how many lifetimes it would take to study all the species in every taxonomic family on earth....

    X, Y and Z "might have" or "could have" played a role and that is the problem. There is no "must have", except in the imagination of those who reject the concept of a Creator. "God did it" is not the whole story but no one bothers to find out. Evolution relies on supposition because they have no direct proof that any of their hypotheses are even true.

    I think it all boils down to the power of suggestion. Do you understand that you can sell ice to Eskimos if the suggestion that they "must have" it resonates enough with their own desire for self advantage. To "sell" something by suggestion, you have to convince people that its in their own best interests to accommodate it....you make them "want" it. It's why they get celebrities to endorse products.....evolution is endorsed by top scientists, the celebrities of the science world. They can't prove it ever happened either but if they promote it, they get to keep their jobs.

    It all about what is in your heart. Evolutionary science does not feed the inner man....it feeds a selfish heart. I believe that we all have a spiritual capacity that, in these times is ever decreasing.....evolution has created that void more than any other 'belief' system in history. Its the 'religion' of the 20th century that has almost completely engulfed the 21st century. Even many who identify as Christians have sold out and fused this 'religion' with their own......that is how I see it and I'm sad about it.
     
  14. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    There are reasons stated in the Bible for all the things that cause us pain or suffering in this world. Would you like to discuss them? It has little to do with amusement.....unless you imagine that the Creator is a fiend who has nothing better to do than to torture people in a fire forever? :rolleyes: That is not a biblical doctrine BTW.

    The blokes always have to win over the girls. He is the one who passes his genes along to the next generation, so she is rightly choosy....she is programmed to select the best. Doesn't science know this?
    Some humans could take a leaf out of their book. [​IMG] The little woman just has to be female.....the male has to do all the dressing up, the chatting up, the dancing and the fancy footwork to win her over. Now that is entertaining...I could watch that video all day...[​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    That is not the way the Bible tells it though...is it...? God is a Creator, not a magician.

    Where YEC's come undone is that they insist that the "days" in Genesis were 24 hour periods, but the word "day" in Hebrew can mean a period of undetermined length, just as we use the term in English. We say "in my grandfather's day" to indicate a period of time longer than 24 hours. The Genesis account allows for an ancient earth as well as very long creative periods....even millions of years. The Creator is not bound by earth time.

    The fact that there was "evening and morning" denotes an undetermined period as well. The Jewish "day" began and ended at sundown, so evening and morning is not a 24 hour day, but a period of less than 24 hours (or overnight) in their counting of time. But again we use the same kind of terminology when we say "the dawn of a new era" without speaking about a literal sunrise. So each "day" began and ended with God having accomplished what he set out to do within that timeframe....and also with a declaration that he was satisfied with his accomplishments thus far.

    Those who identify as Christians will sell God short if they have no idea what he did....when he did it....and how long it took him. He does not tell us how, but we can see how much planning and skill went into the construction of all living things, from the microscopic to the gargantuan. Even the earth itself is designed to support life.

    It's like me saying to you that the computer I am using just evolved without a designer or manufacturer.....we know that is impossible. But think of all the many components that make up this amazing piece of technology. Each one had to be individually designed. Then they had to be integrated sequentially so that not one of them was missing or out of place.

    It takes skillful intelligence to design and to make all the components function as one machine. How can we see skillful intelligence in nature and not ascribe it to an intelligent mind?

    But, you know, without a power source, of what use is it?

    This is a basic description of how God created life.....not with the waving of a magic wand but with intelligent planning and design....and with all the time in the world to accomplish it. Think of all the lifeforms that exist, each with its own unique components, skillfully integrated. The human body is a combination of a multitude of 'components' that all function harmoniously to keep that body alive....but without a power source, all those organisms would be lifeless....useless.

    This is why I cannot fuse evolution and creation.....I accept what science can prove, but I reject what it "believes" when no proof is forthcoming and my own eyes tell me there is so much more to life on this planet than mindless evolution could accomplish.
     
  16. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Your link was not in English.....but I found the English version in the task bar.

    It first speaks about bioluminescence (also a fascinating process by which mainly marine creatures can be seen at great depths) and and it endeavored to explain how it works, but not how it came to be.....I couldn't really see how the Cape Golden Mole fits into this conversation about iridescence...sorry.

    So on that first topic.....

    "Who makes light and why?
    Bioluminescence is visible light made by living creatures. Such creatures are rare on land but extremely common in the oceans. A list of some of the many different kinds of bioluminescent creatures in the world, classified by the different environments in which they live, gives some sense of the relative significance of bioluminescence in the marine environment, compared to in the terrestrial and freshwater realms (Table 1). . . . .

    "How do they make light?
    How do living creatures make light without burning up? They do it through a highly efficient chemical reaction involving an enzyme called luciferase and a substrate called luciferin. Different animals produce very different versions of these chemicals (Figure 14).For example, firefly luciferin is assembled from the amino acids,tyrosine and cysteine, while luminescent bacteria use a reduced riboflavin phosphate (FMNH2) and dinoflagellates use a tetrapyrol,which is related to chlorophyll. These very different chemistries are indicative of the fact that bioluminescence has evolved independently many different times during evolutionary history. In fact bioluminescence is a great example of convergent evolution, where similar characters evolve independently in response to similar selective forces. In the case of bioluminescence the selective pressure was based on the need to survive in dim light environments.Besides many different chemicals, there are also many different ways of activating those chemicals. . . .

    Bioluminescent fact and fiction
    There is a lot of misinformation about bioluminescence. Unfortunately many of these errors have been repeated so often they are beginning to be accepted as truth.
    Bioluminescence is not the same as phosphorescence Even though Steinbeck, Hemmingway and even Darwin referred to the “phosphorescence of the sea” this is a literary rather than a scientific description.
    Phosphorescence is the delayed emission of light from a source that has been excited by light. Examples include glow-in-the-dark paints and toys.

    Bioluminescence is not the same as fluorescence As with phosphorescence light emission is stimulated by light not by a chemical reaction. With fluorescence the excitation wavelength is always shorter, that is, higher energy, than the emission wavelength and emission ceases as soon as the excitation source is turned off. Some of this confusion may have arisen because some, but not all, luciferins are fluorescent and a few pass their excitation energy along to fluorescent proteins like GFP (Figure 15).

    Bioluminescence is not the same as iridescence The beautiful rainbow colours seen in the ctene rows of comb jellies (Figure 17) are often mistaken for bioluminescence. This misconception is exacerbated by the fact that bioluminescence in ctenophores frequently originates from along the ctene rows (Figure 18). However, as a general rule, if the illumination level is high enough to see iridescence, then it is probably too bright to see the bioluminescence.

    All bioluminescence is not bacterial. This very common fallacy probably stems from the fact that most aquarium exhibits of bioluminescence include flashlight fish. The actual number of animals that use bacterial bioluminescence is small compared to the total numbers that synthesize their own light producing chemicals."





    I see that the scientists link bioluminescence with evolution but only in a suggestive manner. These are complex chemical processes which IMV, are not possible without intelligent design and direction in the first place.
    This is why evolution fails for me.....it assumes way more than it can prove, yet it is presented as if it were undeniable fact......which, apparently it always is....but never was. [​IMG]
     
  17. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Ratings:
    +9,841
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    You are hooked to intelligent design because of your religious belief. So, all other things will fail for you. You need to insert a God for all things to be faithful to your belief.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,391
    Ratings:
    +6,720
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Its not just my religious beliefs...its also my own sense of logic. Something that is so incredibly well designed to function as part of a fully functioning 'whole', cannot be the product of blind chance. That to me is the bigger fairy tale.

    Evolution has no proof that what they "believe" happened in the dim, dark past, actually did. They assume that it "must have" because they think it "might have" or "could have".....these are not scientific terms, and yet I see them so many times in the literature.

    They have a "belief" and I have a "belief"....I see with my own eyes that my belief is logical and actually requires less "faith" than what science teaches as fact. Science fiction does not equate to science fact, IMV.

    In order to accept that evolution is true, I have to give up all that belief in God entails.....it involves my past, (where I came from) my present (what God is doing right now in this horrible world to keep my head above water) and more importantly, my future, (what he is offering faithful ones...a solution that will last forever). There is a reason for everything and the Bible supplies all the reasons.....science gives me no reasons at all...and no future to speak of. It is devoid of everything that I need.

    God offers me what science never can....and never will. To swap one for the other would be spiritual suicide......there is no way.
     
  19. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,245
    Ratings:
    +1,778
    Religion:
    nature
    Well at least there is one that I think we can agree on believe or not and that is how amazing and beautiful life is on this planet and that is nice to know. Love the pictures. It is interesting to note that since birds can see ultraviolet lite they are even more colorful to each other with colors we cannot see.

    Do scientists as questions how these traits come about? Of course they do. That is why the study the birds. Do they have all of the answers. Of course not. That is why they study the birds. Does there research support evolution, Without a doubt. The bus was diverted by good scientific research.

    So you are saying you do not believe in evolution? This comes as a surprise to me but only evoultion can explain these amazing patterns of life.

    As for artists my vote is for the bower bird. Clearly they understand perspective in art with full understanding of using color in art an they are champions of performance art.

     
  20. Wild Fox

    Wild Fox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,245
    Ratings:
    +1,778
    Religion:
    nature
    The whole point of this is these patterns of behavior and color are not just a product of blind chance. They have been selected by the females of the species slowly developing the changes in form and behavior over time. Not blind chance and no fairytale but the creative force of life.
    Evolution has an incredible amount of evidence that is advancing all the time and as it does more and more is explained. What seemed like science fiction in the past becomes science fact. No blind faith, only open mindedness.

    As for giving up belief in god or a goddess there is no need. You can and so many do believe a god, goddess or multiple deities and still recognize that the theory of evolution is true. Keep your belief in god and still recognize that evolution is the best explanation. No need for literal meanings from a book written by humans. Science cannot give spiritual guidance, only help us to know who we are and where we came from. Your spiritual belief is yours and creates how you interact with this world. That is not the realm of science.
     
    • Like Like x 2
Loading...