How the heck does something like this evolve?

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
I was just reading about the Portuguese Man o' War jellyfish and saw this interesting paragraph:

They are commonly but erroneously thought of and referred to as a jellyfish. In fact, a Portuguese Man O' War is not a single animal, but rather a siphonophore ? a colony of four kinds of minute, highly modified individuals, which are specialized polyps and medusoids.[1] Each such zooid in these pelagic colonial hydroids or hydrozoans has a high degree of specialization and, although structurally similar to other solitary animals, are all attached to each other and physiologically integrated rather than living independently. Such zooids are specialised to such an extent that they lack the structures associated with other functions and are therefore dependent for survival on the others to do what the particular zooid cannot do by itself.

That's just really fucking cool! But how does something like this come about?

Known about this since I was seven... in The Eighties.

For something else cool, look up the life-cycle of Jellyfish... ONE larval creature enters a plant-like metamorphosis and becomes MULTIPLE adults!

None seem to be perfect, by showing the free-swimming planula larva (many simpler ones can be confused for an un-anchored proto-polyp), egg stage (many could confuse the planula for a kind of "egg"), gender-based reproduction (to show that the adult medusa, rather than the budding polyp stage, is the reproductive adult stage), and multiple ephyra coming from the budding ployp stage (most only show one and do not mention/diagram the others), but look at a few and let the totality of it sink in.

I like this one and this one, though neither make it clear that there are multiple young medusa coming from each budding polyp.

Originally posted by: mofoe2001
I usually just lurk these religious ruined post and laugh, but I must give my input in this, with a quote. From yours truely.

"I prefer to answer the unexplainable with, i dont know, rather than the word, god" - me

Heres another one from me, again.

"Complex questions require complex answers. god is not complex"

use em' for your sigs, make a book about it, make a wiki about me, do whatever the fuck you want. peace and good night.

Might want to use proper grammar, capitalization, and punctuation if you want them immortalized in sigs. Also, complex questions DO NOT always require complex answers.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: Modular
God

http://whereisgod.ytmnd.com/

lol

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat
Noodley appendage or not there must be a first-mover, how else did things start moving? In a void of nothing there are no rules which means anything can happen, in such a case only the greatest super-power wins.

Awesome theory, brah. Which peer-reviewed scientific publication will you be publishing it in?

 

[manowar821]

I love the Portuguese Man O' War. Thus, the internet handle I've had since I was 14. So interesting, so complex, such a beautiful and amazing example of natural selection and evolution.

PS. NSFW is full of shit.

 

[sao123]

there are plenty of examples of irreducibly complex things which could not have evolved.

 

[JTsyo]

You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

 

[Iron Woode]

how is Portuguese Man-O-War babby formed?

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: Summit
its selected, it doesn't necessarily evolve. only the ones that became this siphonophore survived.

Well the individual organisms that make it up evolve. Evolution is just the process of mutation + selection so you're splitting hairs.

No. Evolution happens only to a population, not individuals. Individuals can be selected, but populations evolve.

It's not "splititng hairs" but rather you have a gross misunderstanding of evolution, or at least evolutionary terms.

Anyhow, as somebody else noted this isn't too terribly different than mitochondria and the rest of the eukaryotes.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

Because it numbs long enough to get the job done and after that doesn't affect the mosquitoes ability to procreate. People don't generally feel the bites until after the mosquito is done. If something as simple as a mosquito showed compassion for it's victims maybe that would be evidence of a god.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: sao123
there are plenty of examples of irreducibly complex things which could not have evolved.

No there aren't. Religious people have been plugging away at that one for years. A satisfactory explanation for the evolution of every single proposed irreducibly complex structure has been put forward, with varying degrees of evidence to back each case..

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

First off there is no such thing as "de-evolution" however people do tend to enjoy using that term. Evolution isn't "good" or "bad" and as such doesn't go one way or another.

Anyhow with that out of the way, there is no selection process (at least yet) for nature to favor a mosquito that mutated the lack of injection. I would imagine that way back in the day a mosquito population evolved the "injection stuff" due to some reason and it provided a benefit to selection. Now, however many eons later, there is no reason to select for not injecting.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: Babbles


First off there is no such thing as "de-evolution" however people do tend to enjoy using that term. Evolution isn't "good" or "bad" and as such doesn't go one way or another.

Anyhow with that out of the way, there is no selection process (at least yet) for nature to favor a mosquito that mutated the lack of injection. I would imagine that way back in the day a mosquito population evolved the "injection stuff" due to some reason and it provided a benefit to selection. Now, however many eons later, there is no reason to select for not injecting.

They inject spit as an anticoagulant to make the blood flow more freely. It might not even make every animal itch, it could just be a human problem.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

It's a waste of time to argue with people who use the world of make believe to support their ideas. Religion and Science exist within two completely different paradigms that have no common ground.

This really isn't true at all, or rather is only true for very shallow small-minded people. I've been a professional scientist for nearly ten years now and have worked in two different states in different parts of the country with different colleagues and I would say, on average, most of my fellow scientists have religious beliefs of some nature.

As an aside I found it sort of crazy that in two different states I had a colleague who left the science industry and went to seminary school.

Now, with all of that being said I would say that I haven't run into any crazy fundies in the science world. Most of them - by nature of being scientist, I think - are practical in their religious approach.

Many great scientists of the past acknowledged religious beliefs and even Dr. Stephen Hawking touches on God here and there in "A Brief History of Time." In a way religion and science really aren't so different nor are they innately incompatible with each other. People just make it that way.

 

[Taejin]

people also assume that evolution somehow selects for the best possible end-result. this is not true.. evolution picks whatever comes along that is incrementally better, and that may or may not be the 'best' solution that we can see with hindsight. but that's just the nature of evolution, in some ways its logical (ie selecting for the best traits) but only some traits appear in order to be selected (randomness).

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

Because it numbs long enough to get the job done and after that doesn't affect the mosquitoes ability to procreate. People don't generally feel the bites until after the mosquito is done. If something as simple as a mosquito showed compassion for it's victims maybe that would be evidence of a god.

So the same substance both numbs and irritates? OK. Even then, I'm not saying that it has to be symbiotic, but the fact is that nearly all mammals can recognize them after the fact and the mosquito population as a whole suffers from that "reputation." On an individual basis, no, it wouldn't immediately affect a specific mosquito's ability to procreate but the population as a whole suffers when mammals remember and respond by thwarting or killing any mosquito they notice. The mosquito that bites you and escapes may get swatted by the next host (or the same one at the next meal ) due to the prior actions of both her and her kind. If only some left the mark, a creature may not make the connection and the population with those genes would eventually grow and dominate. Perhaps it has more to do with an aversion being healthy for both populations due to disease? Of course, that would be less of a concern if it weren't injecting you with anything in the first place.

Compassion? Please. I'm saying that it would reduce the chance of them being retaliated against.

 

[Modelworks]

Jellyfish have always fascinated me. They are one of the oldest creatures on the earth and one of the most amazing.
Some facts:

Jellyfish do not have specialized digestive, osmoregulatory, central nervous, respiratory, or circulatory systems yet still perform complex tasks.
Jellyfish breathe using their skin, it is thin enough that the body is oxygenated by diffusion
Jellyfish are composed of more than 90% water
Jellyfish do not have a brain or central nervous system, but rather have a loose network of nerves, located in the epidermis, which is called a "nerve net."
Box Jellyfish has four stomachs or gastric pouches, four eyes appear as small spots on each side of its bell, the circular umbrella like body which propels through water, allowing the invertebrate to have 360 degree vision, it has been found that it also has four separate brains which appear to compete for dominance, as well as four clusters of six well-developed eyes

Now how does something like that evolve ?

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

First off there is no such thing as "de-evolution" however people do tend to enjoy using that term. Evolution isn't "good" or "bad" and as such doesn't go one way or another.

Anyhow with that out of the way, there is no selection process (at least yet) for nature to favor a mosquito that mutated the lack of injection. I would imagine that way back in the day a mosquito population evolved the "injection stuff" due to some reason and it provided a benefit to selection. Now, however many eons later, there is no reason to select for not injecting.

I used "de-evolution" for the lack of a better word... Blind cave fish "evolving" useless vestigial eyes is the first step to eliminating them in the environment where they aren't needed, but it's still not "advancement" from that particular perspective (present).

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

Because it numbs long enough to get the job done and after that doesn't affect the mosquitoes ability to procreate. People don't generally feel the bites until after the mosquito is done. If something as simple as a mosquito showed compassion for it's victims maybe that would be evidence of a god.

So the same substance both numbs and irritates? OK. Even then, I'm not saying that it has to be symbiotic, but the fact is that nearly all mammals can recognize them after the fact and the mosquito population as a whole suffers from that "reputation." On an individual basis, no, it wouldn't immediately affect a specific mosquito's ability to procreate but the population as a whole suffers when mammals remember and respond by thwarting or killing any mosquito they notice. The mosquito that bites you and escapes may get swatted by the next host (or the same one at the next meal ) due to the prior actions of both her and her kind. If only some left the mark, a creature may not make the connection and the population with those genes would eventually grow and dominate. Perhaps it has more to do with an aversion being healthy for both populations due to disease? Of course, that would be less of a concern if it weren't injecting you with anything in the first place.

"In order for the mosquito to obtain a blood meal it must surmount the vertebrate physiological responses. The mosquito, as with all blood-feeding arthropods, has evolved mechanisms to effectively block the hemostasis system with their saliva, which contains a mixture of secreted proteins. Mosquito saliva negatively affects vascular constriction, blood clotting, platelet aggregation, angiogenesis and immunity and creates inflammation. Universally, hematophagous arthropod saliva contains at least one anticlotting, one anti-platelet, and one vasodilatory substance. Mosquito saliva also contains enzymes that aid in sugar feeding and antimicrobial agents to control bacterial growth in the sugar meal. The composition of mosquito saliva is relatively simple as it usually contains fewer than 20 dominant proteins. Despite the great strides in knowledge of these molecules and their role in bloodfeeding achieved recently, scientists still cannot ascribe functions to more than half of the molecules found in arthropod saliva. One promising application is the development of anti-clotting drugs based on saliva molecules, which might be useful for approaching heart-related disease, because they are more user-friendly blood clotting inhibitors and capillary dilators."

If you just don't have any idea what something does it's a good idea to seek a bit of information before pondering about it : ) They don't just inject stuff to piss people off.

Mosquitoes only eat once before laying eggs from what I understand, which is why everyone isn't get hep c from them (not completely sure about this). They don't feed off blood for food for themselves. Female mosquitoes need it for laying eggs.

Their "reputation" doesn't matter it's applied across the entire species there's no selective action that would make the less reputable mosquitoes more survivable. If what you said were true and the less reputable ones started getting selected for no reason perhaps then there'd be evidence against evolution.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: JTsyo
You just have to wonder when mosquitoes will evolve to where they inject heroin into their victims. That way people would seek them out and give blood willingly.

Why haven't they at least dropped the irritant/allergen they inject? Wouldn't that be a relatively easy thing to evolve (de-evolve?)? Why haven't they stopped injecting anything when they take blood, so as to stop spreading disease and killing their hosts? I know... I know... because the ample supply of hosts means that it hasn't affected their ability to survive; but why inject anything other than an anesthetic in the first place, especially when it's going to be the opposite (irritant)? That just makes them unwanted and gets them slapped/killed by their larger, annoyed, hosts.

First off there is no such thing as "de-evolution" however people do tend to enjoy using that term. Evolution isn't "good" or "bad" and as such doesn't go one way or another.

Anyhow with that out of the way, there is no selection process (at least yet) for nature to favor a mosquito that mutated the lack of injection. I would imagine that way back in the day a mosquito population evolved the "injection stuff" due to some reason and it provided a benefit to selection. Now, however many eons later, there is no reason to select for not injecting.

I used "de-evolution" for the lack of a better word... Blind cave fish "evolving" useless vestigial eyes is the first step to eliminating them in the environment where they aren't needed, but it's still not "advancement" from that particular perspective (present).

I understand why you use that word; most people typically do I just wanted to take a moment to point out that the word really doesn't exist.

Also blind cave fish are a bit interesting. However nature, at least to my knowledge, does not evolve the elimination of "useless" body parts. It is all about breeding and basically having eyes or not having eyes in a cave does not provide any benefit to nature selection; both situations are effectively neutral. Any reason for nature to favor not having eyes doesn't involve any sort of directional change to remove a useless body part, but rather there must be some benefit to not having them (e.g. conservation of energy during embryonic development).

 

[Oceandevi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQmFWYWqTZA&feature=fvhl

This is the debels work.

 

[dguy6789]

There's probably less than 20 posters in this thread who have even a remotely acceptable understanding of evolution. I suggest you do some reading. Most(probably all) of your questions will be answered.

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: Oceandevi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQmFWYWqTZA&feature=fvhl

This is the debels work.

this is way better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtllMTJMnlg&NR=1

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu
snip

Mosquitoes only eat once before laying eggs from what I understand, which is why everyone isn't get hep c from them (not completely sure about this). They don't feed off blood for food for themselves. Female mosquitoes need it for laying eggs.

Like HIV, HepC is a delicate virus outside its normal host, and doesn't infect/reproduce in mosquitoes. It won't survive more than say, a few minutes in a mosquito. Maybe in the history of mankind it's been transmitted that way once or twice, but there's no record of it.

West Nile Virus and some encephalitis viruses are able to infect mosquitoes and humans, thus we see the mosquitoes transmitting the virus.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Babbles
[

Also blind cave fish are a bit interesting. However nature, at least to my knowledge, does not evolve the elimination of "useless" body parts. It is all about breeding and basically having eyes or not having eyes in a cave does not provide any benefit to nature selection; both situations are effectively neutral. Any reason for nature to favor not having eyes doesn't involve any sort of directional change to remove a useless body part, but rather there must be some benefit to not having them (e.g. conservation of energy during embryonic development).

There is also a fish like creature that has no eyes but its skin camouflages itself to whatever it is near. Pretty amazing feat for something blind. They are studying it now to possibly use it in color changing devices like e-paper.

That is some impressive evolution.