Facebook Conversation Re: Evolution - Page 7 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

tbomachines · #91 02-10-2011, 05:37 PM

Btw I should add, I honestly applaud biochem for devoting that much time to write a response albeit long winded. I am truly a bit jealous of that - I can't find that much time out of my day to do anything, much less post on here. Who knows, maybe he/she will become interested in old MBs by exploring the forum? I would recommend it

Jorn · #92 02-10-2011, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbomachines

I also hate when people assume superiority on an anonymous internet forum because they have a college degree. Like we all bought Mercedes and are relatively successful because we all dropped out of high school and became ignorant to education

.

Considering that most here drive 20 to 30 year old cars not a bad assumption when we are discussing evolution.

450slcguy · #93 02-10-2011, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbomachines

I also hate when people assume superiority on an anonymous internet forum because they have a college degree. .

Over the years, I've known a lot of well educated folks who were a few balls short of a full rack. Earning a degree is a fine thing, but it doesn't mean you have more knowledge or wisdom than someone without a degree.

tbomachines · #94 02-10-2011, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorn

Considering that most here drive 20 to 30 year old cars not a bad assumption when we are discussing evolution.

On that note, I drive one of my friends in my grad program back to his apartment after class once a week in my 300E. He had an old 70s mercedes as a first car although he can't remember what it was (sounded like an early w123) but he always comments on how everything is almost the same in terms of layout, shifter, etc. It wasn't until the mid 90s that MBs really changed their interior.

Interesting link with great pictures on MB's evolution over the years.
http://karakullake.blogspot.com/2008/10/mercedes-benz-evolution.html

Also, one of my dream cars...
http://www.autowallpaper.de/Wallpaper/Mercedes/Mercedes_Benz_190E_Evolution_2/bilder/MB_190E_2.5_Evolution_2_2.jpg

kerry · #95 02-10-2011, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj67coll

Actually that is not entirely true. The fact that tuscless elephants are being selected for artificially (by human predation) rather than naturally by some other factor is in fact still evolution at play. In this case you may call it evolution by artificial selection rather than evolutoin by natural selection.

- Peter.

A substantial part of the beginning of Darwin's Origin of Species is devoted to the artificial selection of pigeons by humans. It's from that example that he argues that natural selection could work in a similar way.

Botnst · #96 02-10-2011, 07:34 PM

Why is selection through human agency, "artificial"?

pj67coll · #97 02-10-2011, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Why is selection through human agency, "artificial"?

It's not really, which is the point I was trying to make with my post. Reason I mentioned it is because people often assume that if humans are involved in the process it's not nature and thus artificial.

- Peter.

Botnst · #98 02-10-2011, 10:19 PM

Yeah, that's the way I look at it, too. If folks make man "unnatural" then that means he is specially created. I don't think we really want to go there.

Botnst · #99 02-10-2011, 10:22 PM

Instead, I would argue we do what every other species/population does: exploit resources to the maximum possible. The more efficiently we do that, the more likely our genes will propagate down through time. Except the endpoint of exploitation (in either direction) is extinction. That's a downer.

kerry · #**100** 02-10-2011, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Why is selection through human agency, "artificial"?

Artificial in the sense that the selection is based on a pre-existent plan in our minds to produce a certain outcome--ie a faster pigeon. Presumable, natural selection does not pre-exist in a being's mind.

Botnst · #**101** 02-11-2011, 08:37 AM

^ True. I just think that the term 'natural' used as distinct from 'human' conveys an unfortunate message of special creation.

pj67coll · #**102** 02-11-2011, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

A substantial part of the beginning of Darwin's Origin of Species is devoted to the artificial selection of pigeons by humans. It's from that example that he argues that natural selection could work in a similar way.

Now that I think of it I'm amazed I've never read "Origin of Species" myself. I shall have to change that soon. I have been to "Down House" though. Although unfortunately it was closed for the season when we visited so we could only roam around the grounds. Spending more time there is way up on my to do list when I visit England again.

- Peter.