Garrie - Excellent point. Thank you. Jim
On Jul 17, 4:45 am, GarrieMushet <[email protected]> wrote:
> If sleeping was dangerous enough to kill all animals that need lots of
> sleep, then indeed, those animals would have died out. But they
> didn't.
>
> The fact of the matter is that most animals who sleep did NOT die out,
> and therefore they WERE able to survive and reproduce.
>
> So rather than thinking that the theory of evolution is wrong based on
> your hypothesis that sleep isn't compatible with naturally selected
> highly evolved beings, I would tend to think that your hypothesis that
> sleep isn't compatible with naturally selected highly evolved beings
> is flawed.
>
> There are many examples of features and characteristics that have
> evolved that increase the risk of death. But as long as this risk of
> death does not kill people too early, then they have time enough to
> reproduce, and their traits will be passed on.
>
> These are not exceptions to the theory of evolution, they are simple
> traits that, whilst they may decrease the quality and length of life,
> they do not do so enough to reduce the chances of reproducing. If they
> did, those characteristics WOULD have died out.
>
> On Jul 14, 6:35 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > As I understand one basic premise of the theory of evolution,
> > survival of the fittest prefers individuals that live longer, breed
> > faster and leave more progeny. Yet two traits we possess – sleep and
> > intelligence – seem to contradict this preference.
> > Sleep works against survival for, while sleeping, an individual can
> > hardly defend against attack and consumption. So evolution would seem
> > to have selected those individuals needing less and less sleep, until
> > sleep would no longer be needed. Yet today, maybe one billion years
> > after speciation began, we still need our 8 hours of sleep.
> > Intelligence also seems to disprove the all-encompassing scope of
> > evolution. Those individuals better able to recall experience and
> > predict the future would have an advantage in food-gathering, mate
> > selection and progeny protection. Yet we hardly seem smarter today
> > than humans living thousands of years ago.
> > Are these traits exceptions to evolution? Are there other
> > exceptions?
> > I expect so. But no one discusses them. Why not?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
