Seeing the Serpent [Human Evolution]

University of California, Davis ^ | 19 July 2006 | Staff (press release)

[Quark2005]

However I htink this woman's theory about snakes and primates and mammals is idiotic.

It sounds sketchy to me, too. However, the article does have the disclaimer that it's only a hypothesis at this point.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

She, in my humble opinion, is incorrect. Dinosaurs were chomping on small mammals since they started to differentiate from reptiles.

[Michael_Michaelangelo]

[Quark2005]

You have nothing but supposition to assert such.

Nothing except that the theory of evolution has shown to be consistent everywhere it has been tested in the zoological realm.

We have nothing but supposition to assume a particular star is held to the rest of Milky Way by gravity, other than the fact that other stars tend to obey gravitational theory. Do you think we try to prove the Gravitational Law works for every new star that's discovered?

Evolution is known to be such a ubiqitious concept that it's not a stretch to assume it generally works, as is done with any well-established theory in science.

[Ancesthntr]

"There's an evolutionary arms race between the predators and prey. Primates get better at spotting and avoiding snakes, so the snakes get better at concealment, or more venomous, and the primates respond," Isbell said.

Well, a couple of our more recent responses are the 12 gauge shotgun and night vision goggles. Let's see the snakes match those.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

A monkeys CRIDer's anus is an 'evolutionary adaptation" as well a monkeys CRIDer's fingers. They developed to fling feces at evolutionists.

I fix because I care...

[webstersII]

Just because you have an idea about how the teeth came to be, that does not mean your idea is a fact. There is very little known about this fish and its history, so you are way overstating your case. That is why adding the word "presumably" is a reasonable modification.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

They try to use evolution to explain how primates use their eyes and limbs, to conceal the fact that evolution can't explain how they got eyes and limbs in the first place.

The only ones concealing anything are the creationist sources of disinformation, which hide the fact that evolution can and does explain eyes and limbs and more.

[Sam's Army]

What are your feelings on the current situation in the Middle East?

[Rudder]

In South America, monkeys arrived millions of years before venomous snakes, and show less specialization in their visual system compared with Old World monkeys and apes, which all have good vision...

I spent a miserable research summer watching squirrel monkeys (new world), and their compound was swarming with flies. The monkeys would sit quietly and when a fly went by they would simply pluck it from mid-flight with their fingers (then eat it). That's not shabby hand-eye coordination.

[Tokra]

That's the beauty of evolution creationism. theory, none of the hypothesis they dream up needs to be proven,and it doesn't matter if it clashes with all other hypothesis. All one has to say is: "the Bible tells me so".

How simple and easy - no thought required!

Why don't we do the same with ALL sciences? Why bother studying astronomy? Let's just say everything revolves around the Earth - then we don't have to worry about pesky things like scientific research.

Why bother studying medicine? If someone gets sick, we can just say: "It's God's will".

See how easy life could be?

[PaulJ]

Spiders are just so... alien.

There are theories that our fear of spiders is innate.

[Quark2005]

That is why adding the word "presumably" is a reasonable modification.

Fair enough - but it's a reasonable presumption.

[Junior]

Really? Then you can answer two things:

1) What is the Theory of Evolution (in your own words)?
2) What are the problems with the Theory of Evolution?

Note, if you do not answer these questions we'll just have to assume you have absolutely no idea of that of which you speak, and can therefore be dismissed as the ignorant troll you probably are.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[bondserv]

YEC "snake charmers" seem to have evolved beyond this evolutionary setback. To us the earth is flat which makes it easy for us to just reach out and grab those little buggers.

[ZULU]

Wow!!!

See any herps?

[LibertarianSchmoe]

proponents of the hypothesis lump their critics in the category of "uneducated fanatics" and go back to spinning fantastic elaborations of the theory.

Sounds like an unproven, non-universally-accepted hypothesis you've got there.

[bondserv]

Really? Then you can answer two things:
1) What is the Theory of Evolution (in your own words)?
2) What are the problems with the Theory of Evolution?

Note, if you do not answer these questions we'll just have to assume you have absolutely no idea of that of which you speak, and can therefore be dismissed as the ignorant troll you probably are.

It all comes down to "Evolutionary Pressures".

[Seamoth]

This reminds me of an article I read on fear & learning in monkeys a while ago.

Basically, monkeys aren't born with fear of snakes; they only start fearing snakes when they see another monkey fearing snakes.

However, if a monkey sees another monkey fearing, say, flowers... the only thing that that monkey learns is that some monkeys are crazy.

The conclusion of the article was that fear of snakes and other dangers were instinctive & genetic, but it was dormant by default and had to be "triggered" by external stimulus before it could be expressed. This fits in with a lot of genetic-influenced behavior we see (e.g., alcoholism; little kids don't steal from their parents' liquor cabinets--they have to take their first drink before becoming alcoholic).