Evolution vs. De-Evolution

Richard L. Hall rhall at webmail.uvi.edu
Mon Sep 18 13:00:10 EST 2000


Are you serious?

Evolve is evolve...there is no such thing as de-evolution....the term 
appears to be an oxymoron.

This post is on the slippery sliddy slope of sophism.... [Spiro Agnew 
be proud dat!]

rlh

>Evolution vs. De-evolution
>
>The natural process of our body is to de-evolve. If we would all stop
>using our legs, they would de-evolve in a few hundred or thousand
>generations. Naturally, everything has the tendency to de-evolve thus
>providing minimally evolved systems to survival, including our
>intelligence.
>
>The process of evolution is very strongly guided by de-evolutional
>aspects. In the future if machines would be serving us and relieving
>the burden of our creativity due to their superior intellects, there
>would be no survival and economic pressures for us to use our brains
>and we would begin a rapid de-evolution process in our intelligence.

A.B. Dick?

>
>Only when stressing organs to uncomfortable levels do we experience
>evolution? We are all struggling for better life, but it is the
>necessity of humanity to stay uncomfortable that drives our
>intellectual evolution, otherwise we would all de-evolve quickly.

Better life?  This was borrowed from Marx.

>
>The extent of intellectual de-evolution can take place incredibly
>rapidly. To point out one example, in one neuropsychological test it
>was shown that senior citizens moving to retirement homes dropped in
>their IQ dramatically within one year compared to ones who stayed at
>home to take care of themselves after retirement.

This has nothing to do with evolution since these folks are post 
reproductive...

>
>The brain has to be used actively every single day for it to stay
>young. Young people have more hormones that naturally motivate them to
>be active. Older people were shown to be able to maintain their IQ when
>they remained mentally active.

Then you die.

>
>Many people think that if they win the lottery, they would quit their
>jobs and move to an exotic location and stop working. Most Americans
>are obsessed with pursuing a financial goal that 99% will never reach.
>They miss out on a lot of life because of this work obsession. But then
>again, more work comes with more stress and that sparks evolution.

Great I win 5 million bucks and evolution of humanity goes into a tailspin.

>Stress invites evolutionary mutations in higher levels, thus more
>cancer, more health problems, more psychiatric problems and more
>obesity (it is well known that food relaxes stress temporarily).
>Americans must always chew on something, such as chips, sodas, etc.
>These things, especially carbohydrate substances that add to blood
>sugar levels give a feeling of temporal calming. The result is the 50%
>obesity related to stress. In Europe the rate is much lower as work and
>lifestyles are much more relaxed (some other factors as well), thus
>people are not so addictive to relaxing appetizers.

Stress induced mutations?  Man, woman, and child...life is a mutagen.

>
>Quite interesting information I found recently is that evolutionary
>mutations are not completely random as it was thought. This has been
>shown by bacteria in a sugar solution to mutate toward metabolizing
>sugar faster than random chances would predict.

Directed evolution is a total fallacy that has been rejected time and 
time and time again.

>
>The same type of mutations plays a big role in human evolution as well.
>One such example of a decision-making system is a neuron. A neuron
>forms connections with other neurons, and since this network formation
>is completely automated and independent from intelligence, the same
>rules guiding mutations of bacteria beating chances probably governs
>neuronal network formation toward the desired state. We did evolve from
>bacteria originally.

Oh great gobbly gook... your choice of model examples astounds me. 
And since when did humans evolve FROM bacteria?  Most folks agree 
that prokaryotes predate eukaryotes and that eukaryotes have 
incorporated significant prokaryotic features, BUT that is a long, 
long way from believing we are monophyletically linked.  Sorry it 
this seems arcane, but you are over simplifying.

>
>So to explain neurons, one must speculate as to how bacteria beat
>chances of mutation. One idea I had is to place focus on de-
>evolutionary features. Bacteria may evolve toward many directions at
>once, but de-evolves toward the unnecessary features automatically, the
>same way our legs would de-evolve if we would not need them. Or the
>bacteria de-evolve, as it cannot metabolize whatever it was originally
>intended for into some basic un-metabolizing form and starts with a
>clean program somehow. Speculation is needed in this area, but I don't
>think the problem will be very hard to solve, and insight then might be
>naturally given to the rules of neural network formations.


Beat chances of mutation?  Sounds like direction evolution again.

>
>Our body invites mutations when undergoing stress. Our body is very
>stupid actually. An example. When we see something very disgusting or
>hear sudden very stressful news, many people throw up as a result. The
>body thinks that it feels stress, and its only conclusion is that there
>must be some biological problems causing the stress. So the first
>reaction is that it gets rid of all the food in the stomach by throwing
>up and stress is also usually accompanied by diarrhea.

Invites?

>
>People under extended stress develop all kinds of health problems.
>Kidney problems, liver problems, arthritis, and many other diseases,
>all results of stress as the body is just stupid and reacts without a
>brain to stress: "duh, must be bad food". Chemical imbalances appear
>everywhere in the body. Such imbalances invite mutations, just as seen
>with bacteria, and tumors, vascular diseases, and all the classic
>diseases leading deaths are typical results of developed from ongoing
>stress.
>
>Many cultures realized the secret to long healthy life: no stress and
>the only thing the body appreciates: "good food" and exercise.
>Unfortunately that type of lifestyle would result in intellectual de-
>evolution. Evolution needs an unhealthy stressful lifestyle.

Very nuvo health...alt.lifestyles, not science.

>
>George Bajszar
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.

Richard L. Hall, Ph.D.
Comparative Animal Physiologist

University of the Virgin Islands
2 John Brewers Bay
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 00802

340-693-1386
340-693-1385 FAX

rhall at uvi.edu

"Live life on the edge...the view is always better"  rlh


---






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list