Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Joe 6-pack

I learned in an nineth grade anthropology class that it is not survival of the fittest. It is survival of the most adaptable.


68 posted on 03/06/2018 4:35:16 AM PST by Vermont Lt (Burn. It. Down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Vermont Lt
That's still a circular argument regardless of the semantics. We define the, "most adaptable," by those that adapt (i.e.,survive.)

If a species of red bird develops a mutation that causes some to be blue, and they happen to live in an area rife with red flowers, the green birds will contrast with the environs and be easy prey. On the other hand, if the red flora succumbs to plant disease and is replaced with green foliage, the green mutation will have the upper hand. Neither, of their own accord, is more fit or more adaptable. They are either beneficiaries or victims of fate (as the secularist would call it) or design (as the creationist would term it.) In either case, there's still a very, very long leap to the red or green specimen becoming a new species, much less an entirely new class of vertebrae (ie. When does the green bird become a mammal?)

69 posted on 03/06/2018 5:53:50 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Qui me amat, amat et canem meum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson