🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:48:23 UTC No. 16141287
What is his actual giga I.Q contribution to science?
What is there to evolution beyond what every child is taught in elementary school, survival of the fittest, small changes accumulate over time, eventually new species.
Surely that can’t be all there’s to it? Like in elemntary school you learn that Newton “discoverd” gravity and you’re like “ok whatever that’s kinda evident” but then you learn calculus and realize how insane that Newton invented it, not only that but it was fluency at calculus way beyond what normies lean in high school, and how he used to calculate the motion of planets and solve hard problems and that’s only the tip of the iceberg. You’re left with no choice but to bow down to his genius.
I’ve never felt impressed after watching or reading something related to evolution/paleontology , it all feels like vague conjecture and bickering and then you hear idiots like Dawkins talk about evolutionary psychology and if that sort of nonsense doesn’t bug you, you’re…
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:53:28 UTC No. 16141294
no that's pretty much it.
if you look into his actual writings, he was pretty off the mark himself. for example, his proposed mechanism for natural selection would have resulted in all siblings being identical, but apparently he didn't think it through that much.
his main contribution really was just pushing the point that it's a gradual change based upon what survives best, as opposed to the prevailing ideas of the day of Lamarckism (changes acquired by an organism in its life, e.g. getting swole, are passed onto its offspring innately) and orthogenesis (everything is gradually developing towards the "ideal organism" - which, strangely enough, seems to be a rich old white Anglo man, the usual supporters thereof)
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:55:33 UTC No. 16141299
>>16141287
>I’ve never felt impressed after watching or reading something related to evolution/paleontology , it all feels like vague conjecture and bickering and then you hear idiots like Dawkins talk about evolutionary psychology and if that sort of nonsense doesn’t bug you, you’re…
Same. I would be impressed if this nigga contribution was some demonstrated mechanism how chimps evolve into humans but all I got was braindead low IQ speculations. He was matyred because of his opposition to christtrannies, nothing more. Shit would be so cool to know the mechanism how metamorphosis in insect evolved. I want to have metamorphosis ability too!
But no shit. He literally just collected a bunch of animals and put them into trees and tell us how some may evolve into another.
Lmao.
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 23:04:41 UTC No. 16141313
>>16141299
>I would be impressed if this nigga contribution was some demonstrated mechanism how chimps evolve into humans but all I got was braindead low IQ speculations.
That mechanism is literally "All the girl chimps want to fuck the increasingly tall, upright chimp chads who are brave enough to travel out into the grasslands and brave the lions to smash gazelle skulls with their own thigh bones and bring back delicious meat", idiot.
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 23:08:15 UTC No. 16141320
>>16141313
think again moron, deeply and realize how retarded that sound.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:11:04 UTC No. 16141385
there were many other proposed models of evolution at the time. all of them were falsified. ironically, the reason why darwinian evolution survived is because it's the most braindead retarded simple among all of them that makes it almost unfalsifiable. lmao, just random mutation, survival of the fittest will give rise to all species bro, no need to show anything else. technically this can never be proven false cause you know, random mutations, everything could happen. the genomes of your next child can literally randomly mutate into that of a dragon and give birth to a new species.
this also make darwinian evolution the weakest model of evolution and very uninteresting because it tell us nothing else about the evolution process, how to evolve, except you know, randomly under the fitness function.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 03:10:48 UTC No. 16141541
>>16141287
>>16141299
>>16141385
This was before the discovery of genes and mutations to being with. Being able to recognise common descent without knowing what DNA was is a pretty big step
>ironically, the reason why darwinian evolution survived is because it's the most braindead retarded simple among all of them that makes it almost unfalsifiable
It survived because it has been observed and tested for well over a century now
>the genomes of your next child can literally randomly mutate into that of a dragon and give birth to a new species
Yeah that sounds like something I’d expect to come from the mouth of someone of your intelligence
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:13:44 UTC No. 16141581
>>16141320
Care to actually explain why this is retarded, or did you just want to make it clear you can’t comprehend it?
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:24:11 UTC No. 16141589
>>16141287
James Hutton figured out evolution before Darwin was born. Scottish people > English people.
Evolution is not merely survival of the fittest either. Life does not evolve solely out of adaptation to the environment. "Environment" is for the most part the byproduct of internal processes. It's the internal desires that compel life to evolve more than the environment. And what do these desires want? To dominate.
(You) are a byproduct of such processes too. The "I" is an internal construction for the purpose of domination.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:26:32 UTC No. 16141592
>>16141292
>in the beginning God created the plants and animals
>darwin: NOOOOOOO!!!!! REEEEEE!!!! in the beginning SCIENCE created the plants and animals