If evolution be as is said, to be carried on over x millions of years?

Question

Then why do we not see people and animals with two half eyes, or half a heart or kidney or a horse with two hooves ond two piglike toes, or a girrafe with a short neck. etc etc.?

Answer 1

You don't know how evolution works, do you?

The animals with mutations as described have a major survival disadvantage, so they didn't survive, didn't pass their genes on, and the mutation didn't stick. Only beneficial mutations that increase chances of survival and reproduction stick around.

Plumberboy - Evolution is the changing of organisms by reproduction, mutation and selection. Without either of those three, evolution is impossible.

nita - Humans are not really evolving now, because standards of living became higher, and currenly, your social background affects your survival and breeding much more than genetic makeup. There is no real selection going on, except in really undeveloped places.

Truth Seeker - Our brain consumes an enormous amount of resources to operate, and your body has only so much to go around. It's always a tradeoff...

Answer 2

i would like to know the same answer if evolution was true and we as mankind where supposed to come from apes what are we to evolve into next and why haven't we as mankind started evolve into the next stage of evolution ??? sorry i know Ive asked another question on top of yours but this has been a long running argument that Ive had with my brother who believes in evolution sorryyyyyy I'm going to email him your question as you've made a better argument than me thanxs

Answer 3

I don't believe that Evolution and Mutation are the same. Evolution happens in the course of millions of years. Mutation can occur in a moment as a result of a chemical

reaction or also in the course of decades of exposition to different elements in Nature.

Answer 4

As the others say, you have this all wrong.  Evolution is the survival of the fittest.  There is fossil evidence of many species that died out because they were outcompeted for food and resources by others, where their characteristics were much less extreme than the hypothetical deadend mutations you mention.

The issue over why we are not evolving is answerable in several ways.  First, the process is slow, so it may be a rare occurence to have a human mutation that confers an advantage.  Second, we may not recognise a superior mutation as one unless there are striking physical features that characterise it.  Third, it is possible to cast the technological achievements of humans as part of the evolutionary process.  Our abilities in medicine now allow individuals who in the past would either have not survived, or not reproduced, to pass on their DNA to future generations.  Isn't medicine therefore a result of a mutation that allowed us to communicate, learn, pass on information to future generations, and therefore an evolutionary advantage?

I cannot imagine that this will affect your thoughts on creation and evolution, but I hope you can see that the alternative to accepting that it is a scientifically tested hypothesis is that the world was created with all the evidence that shows it was not created in 6 days and that we have evolved, and no evidence that it was not.  As a believer in Occam's razor (which I will paraphrase rather crudely as "the simplest explanation is likely to be the correct one") my conclusion is that  the world did not spring into being like that.  But then as a scientist, I have to accept that I cannot prove the non-existence of a god of some sort that created the universe*, but evidence  is completely on one side.  That is not to say you don't have faith and believe in a different view, but simply that your belief is based on faith not evidence.

To return to your specific question, look at the fossil records of evolution of limbs from eohippus to the modern perissodactyl horse that walk on the edge of their middle fingernail.  Look at today's rhino feet - they are still in an earlier form.

(*Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - Carl Sagan)

A couple of follow-ups.  

Of course, the split hooved animals did evolve, it is just that we call them cows, sheep and goats not horses!

  

Someone below says "Why can't people just accept the fact that God created the earth and everything in it?".  Well because it is not a fact.  It is an opinion that some people believe.  Rather fewer in total (living and dead Christians) than those who believe and have believed in all sorts of other religious faiths and origins for the earth.  

I live by Voltaire - "though I disagree with everything you say, I fight to the death for your right to say it."  Think what you like, and if you can persuade people of your opinion by compelling argument fine.  But please don't just tell people what to think!

Answer 5

You've got a good point there, Plumerboy.  I mean, it would have been enormously more advantageous for us to have inherited the physical abilities of Apes, to go with our special powers of speech and technological superior brain, especially during our very early and dangerous days when survival of the fittest really counted.  I wonder why it didn't happen?  Me thinks we Modern Humans are a distinct and single species.  We started as Modern Humans and haven't altered a single gene since then.  Sorry Evos.  'Thumbs down' and look in!!!!

EDIT

Hi PB

Yep.  Had to pop up to Budapest to attend a family church service for my recently deceased (through cancer, here in Cyprus) Darling Wife, who was born there.  Very stressful!! I'm slowly coming to terms with it, with, I have to admit, the distracting help of these battles with our 'dear friends', the evolutionists.  Look how many 'thumbs down' the sweet little 'things' have awarded me.

Answer 6

we do infact see animals and people with mutations like you mentioned, we dont see ALOT of them because those mutations are not advantageous..  

the best adapted organisms (especially true in the animal kingdom) are able to gather food more effectively, thus are healthier, thus can reproduce more successfully.. this eventually leads to more of their genes in the species...

if there is an unadvantageous mutation, such as in your example of a giraffe being born with a short neck, its not going to have its mutated genes become as big a part of the gene pool as other giraffes with long necks, and if it reproduces at all its genes will soon die out...

hope this helps.. =)

Answer 7

Other than wondering why this is in the anthropology section... it'd be better placed in biology.

The hooves and pig toes one, as an example. The difference is caused by many genes not one. One mutation might make the hoof split into two, or the hoof to be missing and just have soft tissue like a toe. You do see odd mutations like this in nature all the time. the rare ones that work better get passed on. Most will just lead to defects that get the animal killed. Evolution is a slow process.

Answer 8

Oh no, but you have to remember that at times it occurs so rapidly that you don't even notice the evolving taking place!

Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? Well that's because the theory of evolution is ridiculous. Why can't people just accept the fact that God created the earth and everything in it?

Answer 9

There are birth defects, mutations and natural selection.

Conjoined twins are a birth defect as are those born with holes in their hearts or lacking limbs. This is when organs don't develop. They never morph into "half heart or kidney" While a horse may have "two hooves" it won't produce parts from a different species (ie  gills such as a fish) Using a computer comparison, My word program will not suddenly morph into a video game.

Mutations are when DNA fails to replicate itself. Our human genome has a great deal of so-called "junk" DNA sequences. These are thought to be leftovers from our evolution and no longer used. (much as you have old code on your computer. It's still there but the program has been updated and the code isn't being used) Extreme mutations, such as us ask about, tend to also be accompanied by physical defects and short life spans. Instead of "half a heart or kidney" a animal my have extra parts but the organ won't work well

Natural selection holds that there's gradual changes in a species. Those individuals that have beneficial changes tend to live to pass their heritage on. One example is that female birds select males with bright plumage. It's been found that such males are healthier and have more resistance to mites. Again, it's not huge changes that jump species or body parts.

Answer 10

Well since when did a tree grow half in the middle then its other half grow side ways. lol no a tree grows one way altogether upwards. A human baby grows not born half baby then grow its other half. Also natrual selection any animal with two half eyes is obviously a defect they will not survive because of that and the gene does not get passed on. Half a heart? No animal has half a heart or ever had maybe smaller or bigger but not half of what its meant to be. Girrafe with short neck well duh they have long necks through evolution so why would any short neck ones defects eat what they eat to survive then pass on their defect I dault it. Basically evolution is like going through a every shade possible colour map you wont see the same colour again but not notice when the next colour came (well you cant see yourself grow from a child to adult can you). Natural selection is like trial and error. We thought to make an airplane we had to copy birds but in fact after many ideas they found out they had to copy boats. Will the blueprint of making airplanes ever be to work like birds again NO. Also they never tested half airplanes with one wing its just stupid.

Answer 11

That's funny. It's like evolution build organs over time. See it doesn't. It microscopically revises them until one that is advantageous is selected. Half an eye or a kidney is not advantageous and would not be present in a population. The first "heart" would have only consisted of a few cells and had limited function. Nevertheless it certainly be a whole heart.

Answer 12

That sort of mutation does occur but it is very rare.  They found for example that if you activate certain genes in a chicken, they grow teeth.  That would be very difficult to rationally explain without accounting for evolution.

http://www.theallineed.com/biology/06030...

Answer 13

I don't think you have a firm grasp of the evolution theory. Back to the books for you my lad.

Answer 14

BECAUSE POPULATIONS EVOLVE< NOT INDIVIDUALS!!!!

If you can not understand the myriad variation that is living kind and haw even a slightly benificial variation can be naturally selected, then you do not understand anything about evolution. NO CROCKADUCKS!!!

I see a lot of these anthropologists do not understand evolution either. Go here.

http://www.talkorigins.org

http://actionbioscience.org ( click on evolution )

http://www.aboutdarwin.com

Answer 15

one basic and simple answer.

*because those traits do not give an advantage which would result in future generations carrying on such a trait*.

a> 2 1/2 eyes would have horrible vision..hence you are MORE likely to die off b4 u reproduce

b> Horse with separate type of legs would not be able to run fast..so would be at a big disadvantage and would die off compared to the 4 hoof horses.

c> giraffes probably did at one time have short necks but because of evolution the short neck ones were at a disadvantage to the long neck ones and died off.

d> as for 1/2 heart or kidney that is self-explanatory..it would be HALF an organ and so not perform the function needed.