Evolution vs. De-Evolution
mastro at harborside.com
Thu Sep 21 17:30:11 EST 2000
I believe the word you are looking for when an organ goes away would be
vestigiation (ps. I am not sure if this is a real word but it would be much
better for describing 'de-evolution') (pps. vestigial though is a real
word). For example the human appendix is a vestigial organ, in the human
evolutionary past our ancestors once had a use for it but now it has no
function. Vestigiation is lso the reason we no longer have tails.......
think about it.
George Bajszar <gyuri at usa.net> wrote in message
news:8q4u1j$3ln$1 at nnrp1.deja.com...
> 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
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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
> 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.
> George Bajszar
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
More information about the Neur-sci