World Katy Perry album declared a bio-hazard by Australia

[Varine]

Evolution is the change of different characteristics from generation to generation among biological groups. The act of people moving plants is not evolution. What the hell kind of schools did you two go to?

My belief stands.

 

[KMilz]

Nope.
This is called evolution. The foreign species are just superior to your local ones and take over. Its the survival of the fittest.

Of course its evolution. All life is part of evolution. Everytime a living organism dies and everytime a living organism is born it is evolution.

It seems arbitrary given your perspective to point out this instance as being 'called evolution' when you consider every aspect of life to be a part of evolution. If everything is a part of it, why bother pointing this particular instance out? It's definitely a matter of survival-of-the-fittest, but given that all life is a part of evolution, it doesn't make much sense for you to declare this here rather than any other place.

 

[Varine]

It seems arbitrary given your perspective to point out this instance as being 'called evolution' when you consider every aspect of life to be a part of evolution. If everything is a part of it, why bother pointing this particular instance out? It's definitely a matter of survival-of-the-fittest, but given that all life is a part of evolution, it doesn't make much sense for you to declare this here rather than any other place.

I'm failing to follow whatever point you think you're making.

 

[KMilz]

Why say this is evolution when evolution covers such a broad spectrum of things?

 

[Varine]

Why say this is evolution when evolution covers such a broad spectrum of things?

Because there is a person, potentially multiple, that don't appear to have a clear understanding of what evolution is.

To begin with, all life consists of is birth and death. The intermediary, where you, I, and all other living things are, is in a segregated state where your goal in life is to reproduce. Besides, you aren't in yourself a thing, your a fucking lot of things, which is to say, the cells. You and I consist of several trillions living things that contribute to your being; they evolve. They adapt to handle cold and hot weather systems rapidly, they develop immunities by identifying known assailants, ect, in a large, cooperative effort, however not typically in one 'life' of a cell. They are born and die like everything else, and that is where evolution comes in, the point of their (along with mine and your) life is based almost entirely on reproduction, and in that reproduction genetic information is changed to allow the offspring to better handle the situation they are born into and potentially information of your past (your cells' past, anyway) is also transferred through genetic history, but that's a whole different theory. It's a very complicated mechanism, but, as far as the general concept of evolutionary progression goes the only reason you are alive is to make more humans. Before the invention of medicine, people lived about long enough to raise their children to maturity before they died; that is what your life is for. Then we figured out medicine, and built hospitals and shelters and everything else of every day life, and progressed to become to the superior species. You do not evolve; your cells might to some extent, but birth and death is all that really matters in evolution, especially on a large scale, because that is where change happens.

 

[KMilz]

I'm not arguing the idea of evolution as you all have presented it, it just isn't relative to the topic - that is, it's no more relevant than it is to countless topics in the Headline News where the idea has never been introduced before, which is why I'm struggling to find its relevance now. Evolution, when studied in high school and before, focuses specifically on Darwinian Theory, where the rule of 'survival of the fittest' is one of the staples of the greater idea. Because those two ideas are so closely related, it's understandable how someone would confuse the greater idea of the evolution of life and the world with the idea of the evolution of a species, especially if they're still in or fresh out of school. Granted, ya'll made your position on the matter pretty clear even if Zakyath seemed a bit close-minded to the whole idea, but if evolution hadn't been mentioned then Accname's point would have been just as clear or more so than it was in the first place, and seeing as how this actual article has nothing more to do with evolution than several others that never had it mentioned in them, I maintain that it's still unnecessary.

That is, unless an argument/discussion on evolution was the goal, here. In that case, mission accomplished I guess.

 

[Varine]

Because the conversations here so routinely stick true to the original topic? It became the goal when Zakky decided to attempt to debunk Acc's post.

 

[FireCat]

It is evolution, just human-induced.

What about snacks... you take into Australia?!

 

[Zakyath]

It is evolution, just human-induced.

By which definition?

 

[Varine]

By which definition?

The regular one.

 

[Accname]

By which definition?

The one we just provided a few posts up?

 

[Zakyath]

OK, both of you reply but none of you answer my (very simple) question (accname referring to nothing doesn't count). This is getting very silly.

 

[KaerfNomekop]

By which definition?

Evolution is the change of different characteristics from generation to generation among biological groups.

Humans moving plants across continents > new plants compete with old plants for resources > stronger plants evolve. Hence, evolution.

You really need to think in the long-term for this kind of thing, you know. There's no good or bad in nature, just what survives and what dies out.

 

[Accname]

OK, both of you reply but none of you answer my (very simple) question (accname referring to nothing doesn't count). This is getting very silly.

Am I now supposed to quote myself? You wanna see copyNpaste?
Sure can do:

All life is part of evolution. Everytime a living organism dies and everytime a living organism is born it is evolution. A slow process of mutations is also part of evolution, but only a small part. Mutations come and go at random, what is important is whether living beings survive the mutation or die.
If the mutation makes you stronger then you have a good chance of living a long life and having lots of sex. This will make the mutation spread around.

If the foreign species are dangerous to the local eco-system then this is because the local eco-system can not deal with the foreign species. Why can it not deal with it? Because the foreign species has advanced in a certain way, that the local eco-system is just not able to respond to.
The local eco-system will either die or adapt to the new situation. Either way evolution is taking place.

This is my definition by which this is human induced evolution.

 

[Zakyath]

Humans moving plants across continents > new plants compete with old plants for resources > stronger plants evolve. Hence, evolution.

You really need to think in the long-term for this kind of thing, you know. There's no good or bad in nature, just what survives and what dies out.

just because evolution always is happening to every living organism doesn't mean that the actions of these organisms are a part of the process that is evolution

 

[Zakyath]

Am I now supposed to quote myself? You wanna see copyNpaste?
Sure can do:

This is my definition by which this is human induced evolution.

that is a description, not a definition.

besides, nowhere in your "definition" lies any criteria under which the acts of humans constitute "evolution".

and I'll punch a third point in here; your "definition" is inaccurate. the mutations aren't a small part of evolution - they are evolution. the living and dying-stuff goes under "natural selection". Natural selection is the driving mechanism for evolution. Natural selection is however not evolution.

 

[Varine]

How are the actions NOT a part of it? The actions of animals, liked beavers knocking down trees into a river complex, have nothing to do with evolution?

 

[FireCat]

The actions of animals, liked beavers knocking down trees into a river complex, have nothing to do with evolution?

No! Evolution "is NOT concerned with the origin of Life" It is concerned with how species/organisms change gradually over time!

 

[Zakyath]

How are the actions NOT a part of it? The actions of animals, liked beavers knocking down trees into a river complex, have nothing to do with evolution?

FireCat has kinda got it right. Beavers knocking down trees into a river complex is more of a consequence of evolution, which may, or may not, in various ways affect other organisms own evolution.