Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 15:20:02 UTC No. 16162360

>>16162356
Probably because they’re the same thing.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 16:21:18 UTC No. 16162441

>>16162356
adaption is not a word.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 16:52:31 UTC No. 16162467

>>16162360
How are they the same? Adaption implies betterment.
>>16162441
Adaptation, whatever?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 16:56:17 UTC No. 16162471

>>16162467
wat

Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 17:12:05 UTC No. 16162487

>>16162467
You can definitely adapt for the worse. Look at cave fish.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 04:14:29 UTC No. 16163517

>>16162356
Whats the difference?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 05:05:57 UTC No. 16163574

>>16163517
Individuals can adapt, evolution is generational.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 08:59:28 UTC No. 16163707

>>16162356
>>16162467
>How are they the same? Adaption implies betterment
Adaptation can be but is not always evolution. Imagine you have a population of great white sharks who eat seals:
>Sharks eat mostly seals
>Seals are wiped out by hunters
>Individual sharks are forced to adapt by switching to tuna
This would be a behavioural adaptation but not evolution, but if:
>Seals return thanks to hunting being banned
>Sharks continue to eat mainly tuna despite seals coming back
>The entire population begins to preferentially hunt tuna over seals over many generations
^ this would be behavioural adaptation and evolution, and if:
>Sharks develop traits to be faster to better catch fast moving tuna
^ this would be physical adaptation and evolution

Usually when people talk about adaptation it’s something like white peppered moths vs black peppered moths, which is evolution. But at a smaller scale single individuals can adapt without evolution actually occurring

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 12:32:15 UTC No. 16163872

>>16162356
More like why do they reduce evolution to adaptation?

Sure, our behavior is partly influenced by our environment. However, our internal desires play a much bigger role in our behavior than our environment does, and it would be silly to claim that we're "adapting" to those desires, which are part of us, not separate.

Evolution is a process by which a species changes over time. This change is not entirely driven by the environment, only partially. Narrowing evolution down solely to adaptation is to neglect to acknowledge the overwhelming presence of the internal drive of the organism to dominate and play.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 12:55:11 UTC No. 16163884

>>16162356
Adaptation is changing what you do with what you have. Evolution is changing what you are so that you can do other things.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 13:00:16 UTC No. 16163888

Because genetic adaptations are the core of evolution.

Apart from genetic drift and a tiny number of complications, adaptation and evolution are essentially the same thing.

Evolution is by definition adaption.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 13:41:15 UTC No. 16163943

>Google it
>”Evolution and adaption are totally different and here’s why, totally.”
>it says this everywhere on most websites
>remind myself of basic causality logic, aka evolution, then look up definition of adaption
>evolution is literally adaption

This was already a no fucking brainer going by simple causality sense.

Is the internet trying to make people dumber? Through search engines? Just the other day I saw an ‘Extinct sand mole discovered again after seventy years!!1” article, but I watched a documentary about the same fucking sand mole like five years earlier…which is still on YouTube…

Age of Misinformation.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 13:44:06 UTC No. 16163947

>>16162467
Adaptation does NOT imply better. Unless you mean better utilizing your immediate environment, but that's often at a detriment. For example walruses adapt to the cold by acquiring excess blubber. This is a detriment in that they become easier prey for polar bears.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 13:45:10 UTC No. 16163949

>>16163884
Evolution is adapting to the environment, and no life anywhere isn’t impacted by their surroundings.

Science has a real pedantry problem. Hair splitting, autistic semantic barriers, etc.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 15:00:49 UTC No. 16164045

>>16163872
>More like why do they reduce evolution to adaptation?
What do you mean by reduce? Evolution is literally just causality moving things along. Matter/energy adapts. If it didn’t, nothing would be progressing.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 16:59:02 UTC No. 16164170

>>16163574
This.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 23:56:37 UTC No. 16164954

Adapt or be destroyed

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 05:01:44 UTC No. 16165266

>>16163949
>Science has a real pedantry problem
No, humanity does since language is such a crutch for information perpetuation while being so fickle and fragile itself, so its not like theological or even simple casual discussions don't often break down into semantic hair splitting.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 05:06:49 UTC No. 16165270

>>16164045
Try reading the rest of my post.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 05:10:48 UTC No. 16165273

>>16164045
>nothing would be progressing.
Nothing must be progressing faster than the speed of light or space wouldn't be able to expand into nothing at those rates.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 09:10:05 UTC No. 16165532

>>16163949
Evolution can occur without being influenced by environmental factors due to genetic drift
>>16163943
See >>16163707
>but I watched a documentary about the same fucking sand mole like five years earlier
There’s more than one species of mole that lives in sand retard, the one you saw was not the one rediscovered

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 09:30:13 UTC No. 16165542

>>16165532
Why would anyone want to see >>16163707 when >>16163574 said it much more accurately and efficiently?

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 10:26:30 UTC No. 16165575

>>16162356
>Why do people confuse adaption with evolution
Do they?

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 12:36:06 UTC No. 16165714

>>16165532
Anon. It was the golden mole. The golden mole was never “extinct”.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 12:37:08 UTC No. 16165717

>>16165532
How does genetic drift not fall into that? It’s happening over time. Jesus Christ you people piss me off.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 12:38:08 UTC No. 16165720

>>16165575
Google it. “Evolution is NOT the same as adaptation, and here’s why” like they’re oil and water. Retards today cant into nuance.

Barkon at Wed, 8 May 2024 12:42:14 UTC No. 16165725

Oh expensive ones, tell me your secret again, how you got to that level

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 13:25:10 UTC No. 16165795

>>16165532
>Evolution can occur without being influenced by environmental factors due to genetic drift

Imagine a group of blue-eyed Swedes up and moves to a small village in Rwanda. The Rwandans all have brown eyes and almost no one even has blue eyes hidden in their genes.

This sudden influx of genes that lead to blue eyes being present in the village is gene flow. The blue eye version (or allele) of an eye color gene has flowed into the population.

Before the population had 100% brown versions. Now it is close to 50%. The gene frequency of the blue allele has increased in this population because of gene flow.

Now imagine that all the Swedes live in the north part of the village. A freak storm comes and kills all of them.

The village has now returned to having mostly brown versions of the eye color gene. This is genetic drift - the percentage of blue eye alleles has decreased in the population because of a random event in the environment.

Finally, let's say that for some reason blue eyes are a real disadvantage in Africa. Maybe these folks are blinded by the sun and so tend to get eaten by lions. Or their associated fair skin leads to lots of birth defects and skin cancer because sunscreen and/or vitamin B supplements haven't been invented yet.

Whatever the reason, the Swedes have fewer kids in general than do the native Rwandans. Over time, there will be an increase in the number of brown eye alleles in the population because everyone with blue alleles dies out or at least doesn't do as well.

We are back to having more brown eye alleles in the population. The frequency of brown eye alleles has increased in the population because of natural selection.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 13:35:51 UTC No. 16165816

>>16162467
>Adaption implies betterment
No, adaptation implies fitness, evolution implies change which can increase OR decrease adaptation.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 15:13:31 UTC No. 16165947

To untangle this we have to consider two very different uses of the word 'adaptation' …

Adaptation of the behavior of individuals of a species to conditions they face during their own lifetimes.
—Example: migration after a home forest burns

Adaptation through differential survival of individuals of a species over long spans of time in which environmental conditions are changing, which presents new opportunities for some individuals and new challenges for others, and leads ultimately to new species.
—Example: evolution of new appendages and lungs allowing some individuals of a species to exploit opportunities in a climate that is gradually becoming drier, leading to those individuals becoming the majority of the breeding population, or ultimately generating a new species that can no longer breed with the ancestral population

Semantics is a big issue preventing people from even getting to the point they were trying to discuss.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 15:15:43 UTC No. 16165950

Organisms do not control how they adapt. Adaptations occur randomly over time and may or may not provide a helpful behavioral or physical change that allows for a successful response to environmental demands. Many adaptations result from mutations that lead to a better chance of survival.

Evolution and adaptation are the same fucking thing.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 15:18:37 UTC No. 16165953

>Adaptation means betterment!

Oh, sure, who WOULDNT want to be better suited to live in a pitch black cave? Who wouldn’t want to be blind and pale white like a worm and deathly allergic to the sunlight…

Fucking cave fish.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 20:12:34 UTC No. 16166276

Fucking retards

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 21:07:48 UTC No. 16166395

Adaptation is evolution. Everything evolves. It cannot be stopped. Artificial intelligence is evolving. Even going extinct is evolution. Evolution is as inevitable as Entropy.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 22:29:47 UTC No. 16166517

>>16165714
There are more than twenty species of golden mole, only when was rediscovered after being thought extinct
>>16165953
Being blind and pale in a cave is adapting to be better suited for living in darkness

Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 23:48:17 UTC No. 16166587

>>16166517
Yeah and now they’re stuck in an evolutionary bottleneck LOL.

Don’t even get me started on crabs.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 03:52:23 UTC No. 16166791

>>16166587
That’s not a bottleneck

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 07:09:29 UTC No. 16166953

>>16165950
Sure they do, the way meek girly men cut off their own foreskins just so women won't get the ick when sucking it is an adaptation they control.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 08:13:49 UTC No. 16166980

>>16163574
adaptation can be generational too

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 08:21:40 UTC No. 16166983

>>16166980
Individuals adapt their behavior and epigenetic makeup to fit their environment, generations consist of fundamental genetic mutation that allows them to slowly evolve to be inherently suited to the environment over many generation.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 10:14:38 UTC No. 16167054

>>16166983
Evolution emerges from adaptations accumulating over long spans of time. It isn't appropriate to think about evolution for short spans of time. A population can take generations to adapt to new selective pressures but that doesn't mean they have evolved. Gene frequencies changing within a population in response to new selective pressures isn't evolution. Even the same genotype can produce different phenotypes in different environments, which again isn't evolution.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 10:30:03 UTC No. 16167071

>>16167054
>Evolution emerges from adaptations accumulating over long spans of time.
No, it comes from nature selecting mutations over time as I just explained.

>A population can take generations to adapt to new selective pressures but that doesn't mean they have evolved.
Every genetic mutation from generation to generation is evolution in action when it happens, adaptation is when individuals use their individual genetics in different ways to fit into the environment.

>Gene frequencies changing within a population in response to new selective pressures isn't evolution.
Evolution is two parts, genetic mutation which is what you just described, and natural selection weeding out mutations that are less suitable for the environment, so genetic changes are definitely evolution in progress.

> Even the same genotype can produce different phenotypes in different environments, which again isn't evolution.
It is when you are talking about population groups instead of individuals. The various individuals using similar genetics in different ways to personally fit into the environment is adaptation, when the genotypes and phenotypes changes in the groups as a result of genetic mutation over time, that is evolution.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 11:07:48 UTC No. 16167120

>>16167071
I think we're using two different definitions of adaptation. I meant that populations can adapt over generations to new selective pressures, I wasn't specifically referring adaptations (things individuals can have and pass down)

>No, it comes from nature selecting mutations over time as I just explained.
Beneficial mutations are adaptations, no? I think they are interchangeable terms on long time scales. Accumulation of adaptations and accumulation of mutations is the same thing

>Evolution is two parts, genetic mutation which is what you just described, and natural selection weeding out mutations that are less suitable for the environment, so genetic changes are definitely evolution in progress.
>when the genotypes and phenotypes changes in the groups as a result of genetic mutation over time, that is evolution.
I didn't describe mutations, I was referring to how every population has a diverse range of genotypes and that simply changing the frequency of genotypes over a few generations doesn't mean the species has evolved. I'm not referring to changes in the genotype itself. You said yourself that evolution is the accumulation of genetic changes but if the genome isn't changing then there is no evolution

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 11:23:31 UTC No. 16167136

>>16167120
Yes because you are using the wrong definition and acting like adaptation is synonymous with evolution because you are one of the people OP was referring to. Populations evolve, individuals adapt.

>Beneficial mutations are adaptations, no?
No, beneficial mutations are selected by nature, its not the result of the animal adapting to its environment, it is the result of nature applying pressure.

No accumulation of mutations by natural selection is evolution, by definition, adaptation is when something changes itself by trying to guess what might be beneficial, but nature is the ultimate arbiter of beneficiality in the long run.

The genome does change from generation to generation thanks to natural selection, if nature keeps selecting the same general genetics it just means that the current average is most suited to the environment, but from generation to generation there will still be mutations they will just get weeded out by natural selection and the average will remain the same and the individuals won't have to do much to adapt to the environment because their genetic instinct will be synchronized with the pressures of the environment.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 12:46:25 UTC No. 16167243

>>16166791
Yes it is, their neck is now a bottle.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 12:47:37 UTC No. 16167245

This thread proves that semantics is a major barrier to scientific discourse.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 20:10:04 UTC No. 16167889

>>16162356
Dumb elf poster

Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 21:43:04 UTC No. 16168010

>>16162356
Why do you confuse adaptation with acclimation, adaptation is used interchangebly when discussing evolution and it essentially translates to a core component of evolution, acclimation is by context often used individualistically and is achievable with an organism in it's current state but in an alien environment.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 02:01:44 UTC No. 16168328

>>16166395
reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 02:31:34 UTC No. 16168377

>>16162356
Evolution is just a long-term, generational form of adaptation

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 02:42:00 UTC No. 16168390

>>16168010
Yeah in real life I hear 'adapt' way more than 'evolve', but maybe that's a country thing. OP is the one confused about people having multiple definitions of 'adaptation'. We use adaptation and evolution interchangeably. Getting white fur to blend into a new snowy environment is adaptation and evolution. The species adapted to new selective pressures. Here I'm using 'adaptation' informally in layman's terms. If I was using 'adaptation' scientifically I'd be referring to the white fur itself.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 03:07:57 UTC No. 16168429

>>16167136
I admit I was wrong about changing gene frequencies not being evolution. Any kind of genetic change across a population could be considered evolution.

>adaptation is when something changes itself by trying to guess what might be beneficial
I've never heard that. An adaptation is a feature an animal possesses (e.g. white fur in a snowy habitat). It sounds like you're talking about acclimatisation like this guy says >>16168010.

>No, beneficial mutations are selected by nature, its not the result of the animal adapting to its environment, it is the result of nature applying pressure.
I assume you're using "adapt" scientifically here instead of informally. Individuals don't 'adapt' to their environment, they acclimatise. Using my definition of adaptation above, beneficial mutations ARE adaptations. They are features animals possess in response to their environment.

>The genome does change from generation to generation thanks to natural selection...the average will remain the same and the individuals won't have to do much to adapt to the environment because their genetic instinct will be synchronized with the pressures of the environment.
In other words the genome doesn't change due to selection, it changes due to background mutations randomising it slightly.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 15:00:17 UTC No. 16169082

>>16168390
Nope. All things must be autistically categorized and put into boxes.

Adaptation =|= Evolution
Heat =|= Cold
Space =|= Time
Light =|= Dark
Science =|= Magic

No nuance allowed.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 15:16:56 UTC No. 16169101

>>16169082
What about when it gets curvilinear and abstract? Spooky action at a distance type of stuff? Quantum physics?

Nothing is 'random' unless you are put in a box where for your purposes, a set of phenomena does not have interference from intrusions and continues from some prior force 'on it's own' like when you shake a lottery and 'random' balls come out.

Randomness = order but randomness also =/= order. It depends on perspective, like superposition or Schrodinger's cat

I did not understand Schrodinger's cat for a long time and am too autistic to understand perspective lol in an efficient way I mean

The Christian in me does say that you cannot mix light and dark, good and evil, salty and pure water, bitter and sweet

Autistic categorisations are Godly

But God as man sees partial, fleshly, subjective perspectives where things appear to be something and not something at the same time

Adaptation is microevolution, evolution is macroevolution - a series of adaptations that result in some bigger divergence like species change, but that's just my rote memory

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 15:19:57 UTC No. 16169107

>>16163707
How many generations does it take to be evolution and not just changes in gene expression?

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 15:35:22 UTC No. 16169124

>>16163872
Isn't the desire the randomness, chaos, experimentation, pattern disruption, recreation, reproduction, interaction, creation, movement, excitement, energy, re-organisation, exchange, and then the harmony of that with the external environment through suppression and promotion of certain traits? I am adapting to my desires to contain, and to release, due to other factors beyond my control all the time.

I am my immaterial, instantaneous energy being which perceives the desires inherent to my physiology and habitat and learns to regulate and contain the desires to 'dominate and play' to strategically utilise them in situations to add to the habitat and refine the quality of the expressions of the spirit driving the species

Intrinsic desire is only the Biblical orginance to 'be fruitful and multiply' and to 'rule the earth and subdue it'. Perhaps there is more utility in conceiving our desires as the dust and the breath of God at the same time. Inherently meaningless and formless in the abstract, but contained in the bodies of separate beings, one of which we know to consciously conceive of God and reflect on ourselves, our environments and each other in shaping the habitat which shapes us.

You are correct in that 'adaptation' is not growth in the same way that adapting to my bedroom does not evolve society.

Evolution is leaking out of our containers and then growing, or changing the containers and other beings in the same process.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 15:49:26 UTC No. 16169140

>>16163888
Adaption to what, in a meta sense? Existence?

>>16167136
>populations evolve

Oh shit, that's us!

>No accumulation of mutations by natural selection is evolution, by definition, adaptation is when something changes itself by trying to guess what might be beneficial, but nature is the ultimate arbiter of beneficiality in the long run.

So what causes the beneficial mutations in gene content and not just epigenetic changes in phenotype? Epigenetics = changing coat colour, moths, right?

That is adaptation?

If a population takes generations to adapt to selective pressures, then does that mean that the selective pressure is actually more to do with the sex drive and sexual health than it is with a trait getting a physical survival advantage?

How do adaptations 'accumulate'?

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 18:50:21 UTC No. 16169402

>>16169101
There are no true dualities. Chaos doesn’t truly exist when there’s a chaotic order to it, allowing the “chaos”.

There is always a preceding background to the foreground. The “music of the spheres”, as Einstein put it. There’s science you have, and science you don’t have—but something you don’t have is still there, lying in wait, for all time.

It’s how he compared Beethoven to Mozart. Beethoven constructed his music, while Mozart discovered it, as though it were an ever-present sympathy.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 18:58:10 UTC No. 16169411

>>16169101
>The Christian in me does say that you cannot mix light and dark, good and evil

There are absolutely shades of good even in highly psychotic people, however unnoticeable.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 19:01:14 UTC No. 16169416

>>16162356
Because evolution is a subset of adaptation.
In case you need the example:
All evolution is adaptation.
Not all adaptation is evolution.
How can this thread I haven't read can have this many replies.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 19:02:26 UTC No. 16169420

>>16169416
>Because evolution is a subset of adaptation
The universe doesn’t evolve?

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 20:10:50 UTC No. 16169537

>No shut up you idiot that’s not what magic is I don’t care if you’re making total fucking sense my beliefs are affirmed I

Magic is religious

The autist is right

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 02:13:16 UTC No. 16170058

>>16162356
it's almost like a species adapting to it's environment is what evolution is

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 13:24:48 UTC No. 16170726

>>16170058
Noooooo-