For evolutionists...part II...?

Question

Give me a break, guys, Im having problems w/ the site...give me some credit...here's question 1 until I have time to type the rest....

1. Which evolved first,

a. The dugestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to eat and find food, the digestive juices, or the body's resistance to it's own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc..)?

Answer 1

To put it logically, I'd say they all evolved in roughly the following order:

-The food to be digested
-The digestive system
-The body's resistance to it's own digestive juice
-The digestive juices
-The ability to eat and find food
-The appetite

Here's why:

The food to be digested and the digestive system could have evolved at the same time or one after the other. Both the food and the digestive system would have to exist before anything else could involve them.

The body's resistance to it's own digestive juice would have to have evolved before the digestive juices could evolve, or the body would have digested itself from the inside out.

The ability to eat and find food would then have to have evolved before the appetite, since one would go hungry if one were unable to eat and find food for which one has an appetite.

To put it historically accurate however, I could not say. I have never studied biological development in much depth, but it sounds to me that it would be difficult to pinpoint the order these things came in unless you refer to a specific species’ individual development of these things. There are many living things in existence that have some but not all of these characteristics. For instance, plants "eat" and "find" food with their roots, but they do not digest them with juices or even digestive systems comparable to, say, ours.

I am anxious to see your other questions. You seem genuinely curious.

Answer 2

Hi, This is a great illustration of a basic concept of evolution that will explain a LOT of things ... the concept of CO-EVOLUTION.

Specifically: Nothing EVER evolves in complete isolation. As humans we tend to subdivide and separate things (what we call 'reductionism') in order to understand them ... but nature doesn't *develop* that way. Instead, EVERYTHING evolves in the presence of other things (other processes, other parts, other organs, other organisms) that are themselves evolving. ALL evolution occurs this way.

It's not like an organism (like humans) has to evolve a complete digestive system in its final state *before* it can evolve an appetite ... or vice-versa. Digestive juices don't suddenly evolve *before* the body can develop a resistance to it (or else those individuals wouldn't last very long).

It's as strange to ask which developed first as it is to ask whether a developing embryo develops the head or the neck first. A head without a neck would be as useless as a neck without a head ... so they develop together.

To pick more illustrative examples:

Intelligent Design people will often ask how all the parts of an eye, or wing can evolve because each part seems to need the others. I.e. they might ask "Which evolved first, the retina or the lens?" This makes the mistake of thinking that parts are evolving in isolation, as if (say) the retina had to be completed before the lens could start evolving. The retina and the lens evolved *together* ... each one driving the other (any improvement in the retina results makes it advantageous for the lens to improve to catch up ... and vice versa). ALL the parts of the eye evolve together, which is how the result (after millions of years) can appear extremely complex.

A second example: "Which evolved first, the bee or the flower?" Answer, the two *co-evolved* ... changes to one producing corresponding changes in the other.

The word 'co-evolution' usually applies to the last example (separate organisms evolving together), but the idea of separate parts of an organ, or separate parts of a process (like digestion) are also examples of co-evolution.

I hope that explains something.

Answer 3

1. food -- anything can be food if it has chemical energy.
the appetite
2. the ability to eat and find food -- the "appetite" could be as simple as chemotaxis, the tendency of microorganisms to move towards higher concentrations
3.the DIGESTIVE system. The body can make stronger digestive juices as it EVOLVES more resistance them. Of course, we ride the ragged edge and it manifests as an ulcer.

Pitifully easy question -- the fact that you used overlapping items to make it sound complex didn't phase me in the least.

Answer 4

Why does one have to evolve before the other? I think your question is baiting the answerer, since it supposes some concepts about evolution which aren't true.

If you need a refresher on evolution, there are plenty online.

Answer 5

1a. The food to be digested.

"Food" appeared before there was a digestive system.

Answer 6

NON OF THEM EVOLVED!!!! Evolution is bull. There is a wide array of evidence that contradicts evolution. Here are some points:

There is no evidence in fossils that the biological life evolve. Scientists examine the fossils of some animals that still live today: no evolutionary changes!

Part of evolution is VESTIGES, organs that LOOSE THEIR FUNCTION OVER TIME. Due to a LOGICAL principle called Irreducible Complexity, if any animal had vestigial organs, there would NOT be any life on earth becuase all systems necessary for life need every organ and if one organ looses its function or is taken away, like a vestige, the system will NOT function. This contradicts evolution, as we humans are alive with the vast species of life surrounding us.

According to the bible, two of each species of animals were brought on Noah's ark. Why would God ask Noah to build a humongous mark if there would only be 8 or 10 animals (as Darwin's Evolutionary theory states: "Life decsended from four or five descendents into which life was breathed - two of each 'descendent' = 8 or 10)

This is not the only evidence that CONTRADICTS Darwinism. The 'proof' listed above is just the most oustanding points.

Answer 7

Hint: we evolved from single-celled organisms! They ate too and by a far simpler process. Everything co-evolved. I'm sooo embarrassed for you.

Answer 8

the ability to hunt for your food

Answer 9

are you really trying to say there's no such thing as evolution? hahahaha