re: Rush Limbaugh thinks evolution is a hoax because gorilla never became human

quote:

---

I never said it did.

---

I was just responding in general, your post was a good leaping point.

99% of biologists think we descended from fish because of fossils discovered that relate to our inner ear bones and jaw.

I'm still trying to figure out what you meant by your "fixed it". Made no sense.

quote:

---

Or to put it another way, if there was originally a Patient Zero primate, and he/she mutated with a beneficial trait, over the course of many generations it would seem that the beneficial trait would eventually dominate the species because the evolved primate had all of the advantages of regular primates PLUS the mutation - sort of like upgrading the trim level on a car.

---

Isn't that exactly what happened though? To the extent that the existence of any other primate conflicts with the priorities of humans, those other primates lose, badly.

Fortunately for those other primates, humans have now placed "not making other primates extinct" on their list of desired outcomes.

It's not like all of the lessor primates would just commit mass suicide upon observing that there is a better model out there...they're going to keep fricking and eating and shitting, then when they come into conflict with the better model, they either die or find somewhere else to frick, eat and shite.

quote:

---

It astounds me that this guy is seen by so many to be the preeminent voice in politics.

---

He's got a lot more insight than that mouth-breather Hawking.

quote:

---

Being "gay" is a choice

---

Ah, so you've never known a gay person. Just ask yourself, straight guy that you are, could you bring yourself to suck a dick? You'd probably require a lot of money to even consider it. Gay guys do it Bc they love it. They love it Bc they just do. They love that dick.

quote:

---

Or to put it another way, if there was originally a Patient Zero primate, and he/she mutated with a beneficial trait, over the course of many generations it would seem that the beneficial trait would eventually dominate the species because the evolved primate had all of the advantages of regular primates PLUS the mutation - sort of like upgrading the trim level on a car.

---

There is not 1 beneficial trait. Different niches have different characteristics that determines what is "beneficial." Different food supplies and living conditions will develop. This is how diversity and a biome develops.

Also, traits are bound in how they spread by geographic area and boundaries. At this point there isn't much boundaries for humans on land. It hasn't always been that way. Other species are still kept separated. What fills the niche of large apex predator in Africa (lions) will be different in North America (wolves). Maybe if they were thrown into the same environment they would out compete each other and one would win out, but as things stand they do not directly compete with each other.

Taking these two things into account is a beginning to contributing factors to biodiversity.

quote:

---

Kafka

---

Glad to see this back. I thought it was gone.

quote:

---

If you were listening to the show and knew the context, he was clearly having a go at people who think we evolved from apes as opposed to evolving from a seperate ancestor species.

---

The problem with that argument on his part is that far more often than not, the folks who would even suggest such a thing are creationists as they frame strawman arguments for those who believe in evolution. Sort of the same way they suggest people that believe in abiogenesis think life evolved from rocks or some shite. No one that has even a rudimentary understanding of evolutionary biology would argue that "humans evolved from apes."

We ARE apes, after all...

We and the other great apes evolved from a common ancestor that was ape like, but no one that understands this would suggest humans evolved from gorillas or chimps.