1 in 4 mammals will be extinct

Im not going to disagree that its a natural process but you have to at least recognize that our species is the major tipping point in alot of these species going extinct. Also evolution is defined as-Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. So animals going extinct is not evolution it is extinction. Darwin termed natural selection for this process when it occurs naturally. However it isnt really natural selection now because a significant portion of these animals are being forced into extinction by human beings not due to naturally occuring phenomenon.

why, because that's what the media shows you? yes, we might be affecting some. but no, we are not the major tipping point. it's just portrayed that way to us by what is linked to us on the internet and showed to us on the television.

we humans like to think we're all-important, be it positive or negative.. we're just another cog in the evolution of the earth. plain and simple.
 
Yes I believe everything that is on tv and the internet. And even though theres valid scientific proof to back up the current sixth major phase of extinction happening on this planet, Im not going to continue to argue a moot point.
 
sigh, its all our fault. why are we having trillion dollar wars that mean absolutly nothing in the grand scheme of things, while or planet is circling the drain
 
Define natural...Are we, as humans, not a natural part of the planet's ecosystem? Many people seem to think that the human population is above and beyond the day to day happenings in the planet's environment, rather than a participant whether we like it or not. If an introduced species outcompetes another species for food and the lesser species goes extinct, is that not natural selection either? Survival of the fittest. As Jon said, I'm not saying that I don't care about anything that happens to this planet. Humans have had a large impact on the environment, but I think it is incredibly arrogant to think that, as a very small part of the natural world, that we can and should fully expect to keep the planet as a whole in some sort of stasis where nothing ever changes. Eventually something will come along and either outcompete humans or just kill all (or at least most) of us off, and the universe will continue on.

Are we part of the planet's natural ecosystem? Our knowledge and intelligence puts us above animals and other organisms, is this really fair and natural? If we did not have our intelligence and our weapons, do you really think we would have the upper hand? Our brains have continued evolving, but our bodies and abilities haven't, we no longer track animals, we cannot scent them, we do not blend in, we cannot run particularly fast away from danger, and we don't even have claws or decent teeth to fight with. IMO, our bodies' adaptations to survive are gone, while animals have adaptations to ensure survival, such as teeth, claws, hearing, smell, ect. If we were to face off between our cavemen ancestors, they would be much more fit and adapted then us to survive in the wild.

Due to our intelligence, we have stopped natural selection in the human race, almost all of us survive to reproduce nowadays. Natural selection is the selection by nature of the strongest, fittest, and most adapted animals. Since we have the medical knowledge to ensure survival, natural selection no longer occurs within us (spare the few who catch uncurable diseases such as cancer or AIDS). Has this caused our race to become weak while animals continue evolving? If natural selection still existed in the human race, would there be any obese or disabled people? If natural selection still existed, the only humans who would survive to reproduce would be the strongest and fittest. However, does natural selection exist in us? The proof is the disabled/obese/sickly/prone people still survive to reproduce (and pass on their weak genes) when they wouldn't have made it past adolescence in the wild.
 
Are we part of the planet's natural ecosystem? Our knowledge and intelligence puts us above animals and other organisms, is this really fair and natural?

Yes. EVERYTHING on this earth is "natural", we were not handed the tools in which we developed technology, our brains evolved giving us the intelligence to do so. how is that any less natural than a monkey using a stick to fish ants out of an anthill? same difference. we adapted and overcame. it is natural for humans, our species, to behave in this manner, because we have evolved this way.

If we did not have our intelligence and our weapons, do you really think we would have the upper hand? Our brains have continued evolving, but our bodies and abilities haven't, we no longer track animals, we cannot scent them, we do not blend in, we cannot run particularly fast away from danger, and we don't even have claws or decent teeth to fight with. IMO, our bodies' adaptations to survive are gone, while animals have adaptations to ensure survival, such as teeth, claws, hearing, smell, ect. If we were to face off between our cavemen ancestors, they would be much more fit and adapted then us to survive in the wild.

you answered your own question there. yes, we have continued to evolve. again, there is no outside force here, handing us the tools in which we develop society or the ways of life, we just use different words for it. instead of saying we evolve, we prefer to use "advance", "learn", "develop", and things like that. we are EVOLVING to utilize new technologies. just because we don't carry huge clubs and have gargantuan gorilla muscles doesnt make us "un-evolved", it just means we've evolved in a different way. our bodies are perfectly adapted to survive, because we have developed the tools to enable us to.

Due to our intelligence, we have stopped natural selection in the human race, almost all of us survive to reproduce nowadays. Natural selection is the selection by nature of the strongest, fittest, and most adapted animals. Since we have the medical knowledge to ensure survival, natural selection no longer occurs within us (spare the few who catch uncurable diseases such as cancer or AIDS). Has this caused our race to become weak while animals continue evolving? If natural selection still existed in the human race, would there be any obese or disabled people? If natural selection still existed, the only humans who would survive to reproduce would be the strongest and fittest. However, does natural selection exist in us? The proof is the disabled/obese/sickly/prone people still survive to reproduce (and pass on their weak genes) when they wouldn't have made it past adolescence in the wild.

yes, natural selection always exists, we have just proven that (for the most part), we can defeat it. (my opinion on this is a bit lengthy, and would end up running the thread offtopic, so i'll leave it out)


The human race being a technologically advanced and "superior" (i put that in quotes because i think it's a crock of crap term) species, doesnt make us any different in the grand scheme of things, because ultimately, nobody handed us fire, or cars, or anything. we evolved, and developed these things on our own. they weren't here waiting for us to find when humans first graced this earth.


ultimately, YES. humans ARE a part of the natural ecosystem. just because we don't live in trees or out in grassy plains under lean-to shelters, doesnt mean we aren't.
 
Yes. EVERYTHING on this earth is "natural", we were not handed the tools in which we developed technology, our brains evolved giving us the intelligence to do so. how is that any less natural than a monkey using a stick to fish ants out of an anthill? same difference. we adapted and overcame. it is natural for humans, our species, to behave in this manner, because we have evolved this way.

ultimately, YES. humans ARE a part of the natural ecosystem. just because we don't live in trees or out in grassy plains under lean-to shelters, doesnt mean we aren't.

Not trying to start anything (just giving my own personal opinion), but haven't our technologies been doing the natural selection for us? We invent the technology, and it helps us survive, but based on our technology is what ensures we survive. Now, due to our technology, we don't have any natural predators aside from ourselves, so is this really natural selection? What is selecting us that makes it natural? Our weapons can kill and we cannot adapt to fight our own weapons since they kill so fast and well. This is natural?

We have sickly/disabled/weak genes in our society, if natural selection still existed in us, would they be here? Would there be people who are less able? By saving and ensuring everyone can survive and reproduce (including the weak), are we not weakening our genes? Are we not leading us to our own demise? This continuing, wouldn't our genes become so filled with problems that should've been eradicated during natural selection? We are ethical beings, we wish for everyone to survive. But isn't this leading us to a weak future? Of course I don't want to go out and just kill all the less able people heartlessly, but isn't this something we are bringing upon ourselves?
 
Maybe the birds will evolve back into dinosaurs now. ;)
 
Now, due to our technology, we don't have any natural predators aside from ourselves, so is this really natural selection? What is selecting us that makes it natural? Our weapons can kill and we cannot adapt to fight our own weapons since they kill so fast and well. This is natural?

Many animals don't have natural predators.

I really don't understand your argument about our weapons that kill 'fast and well' somehow make humans unnatural.
 
AquariaCentral.com