Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Lions and natural selection
redstang281
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 67 (4272)
02-12-2002 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by joz
02-12-2002 2:53 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
You what?
What other reason?
Mark was pointing out the problems of the filter, namely the possibility of the most genetically fit animal being suplanted by an interloper of inferior stock if it has advanced to too great an age to defend its alpha position....
Hence not a good filter....

I explained it. The best father lion would be one who is not only containing good genes, but also one who is young enough to defend the cubs, tribe, mate.. etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 2:53 PM joz has not replied

redstang281
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 67 (4273)
02-12-2002 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by LudvanB
02-12-2002 4:07 PM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
Hey red?...the "correct" representation of the Bible?... Do you know how many wars and inquisitions have plagued humanity just over that? I'm sure that if you got 30 creationists in a room together to debate the issue,you'd just wind up in the end with 30 creationists pissed at each others for being "too ignorant" to see "the truth"...The Bible can be interpreted in dozens of ways and not just small variations so dont try to paint your side as a unified front against the "evils" of evolutionism because most people on your side have a marked tendency of seeing as "evil" anyone who does not agree with their strict POV.
I believe if anyone studies the Bible's without limiting themselves to any other beliefs of origin they will find the Bible's teachings are clear.
I might site myself as an example. 5 years ago I didn't know there were people such as creationists who supported genesis scientifically. However I read the Bible and came to the conclusion that the world was only 6-10 thousand years. I could go on, but I'm not really trying to get down a rabbit hole away from the topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by LudvanB, posted 02-12-2002 4:07 PM LudvanB has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 4:41 PM redstang281 has not replied

redstang281
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 67 (4274)
02-12-2002 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by redstang281
02-12-2002 4:40 PM


So are we done fella's?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 4:40 PM redstang281 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Quetzal, posted 02-12-2002 4:53 PM redstang281 has not replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5196 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 49 of 67 (4277)
02-12-2002 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by redstang281
02-12-2002 2:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:

Mark said ;
Lions seem to take great delight in killing the cubs of other predators, wild dogs, cheetahs etc. This makes obvious sense, more for the pride, due to less competition.
Redstang said:
I believe it makes sense because of it's design, and it's not something that can be aquired soley by the principals of natural selections. In that I mean change overtime, isolation, competition.. etc..
The lion doesn't know it will decrease competition, and by that same logic he doesn't know that killing his own cubs would make him go extinct. You could say he inherited this instintual traits from another species earlier in time, but that's not really the point. The lion is just the variable, the instinctual knowledge is really what we're trying to explain. The instinctual knowledge and how the lion organizes it into survival strategies is really what I'd like explained.

The lion doesn’t have to know about the consequences of its actions. All that matters is that there are consequences, & that they ultimately affect the gene frequency of the population.
Killing cubs of other predators is explained fairly easily. They are easy meat. The action also makes the environment friendlier to the lion, in that it ultimately reduces competition. Consider two hypothetical populations of lions, A & B. In population A, lions do not kill cubs (of other predators). In population B, they do. In population B, there is less competition for food, & more food, in the form of cubs. This behaviour is selected for, as it increases the likelihood of the survival of the genes responsible for the behaviour in the first place. In this case, it’s probably just an existing trait, they routinely go for young of their normal prey species, again, easy meat, just that predator cubs bring extra advantages.
Now, in population A, this doesn’t happen, no gene is selected for, so NS doesn’t occur. But consider, if population A & B are sexually overlapping, the successful gene becomes more & more fixed in both populations, because it brings advantages, sooner or later, the responsible alleles of population A cease to exist, the entire population having the successful gene B.
The lion doesn’t organise anything, sexual reproduction, recombination, gene flow, NS, & neutral drift does the organising. Behaviours are the result of NS as much as anatomical traits.
In answer to your question, where did the ancestral behaviour come from (to coin my own phrase), genetic evidences collectively suggest that the raw material of differing information, & therefore differing behaviour, is mutation, that changed the expression of a protein ultimately responsible for feeding behaviour, meaning that the lion would target other species cubs, that new allele would then be subject to natural selection. This fixed allele was built upon a shed load of other fixed alleles.
I have already postulated how this may have become a behaviour by which a lion will kill other lion cubs.
quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:

If they were his own cubs, he would have a paternal instinct, as they are not, he doesn't.
How did this paternal instinct come to be?

Again, any mutant allele that predisposes the father to favour his own cubs in ANY way, will provide a means of safeguarding them, & passes that mutant allele on to his cubs who now have a greater chance of survival. That paternal gene is still subject to mutation, & any that increase the paternal instinct of the father, increases the likelihood of the survival of that allele.
quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:

mark said :
There are a few small niggles I have. Firstly, I would expect even I could turn over Arnold Schwarzenegger when he's 80 years old. Have I proven my GENES fitness over Schwarzeneggers gene fitness? No, I was able to kick the s*it out of him because he's old.
Redstang said :
Yes, but the alpha male should breed for more reasons than solely distribting his genes. The alpha male should also be able to provide protection to the new cubs. An old male may still have good genes, but not be strong enough to protect the cubs. I think we both agree It's a very good filter.

Any lion breeds to distribute their genes, whether they know it or not.
But it’s not necessarily such a good filter. The future fitness of the pride may just as easily benefit more by having the existing alpha remain, rather than getting a new one. As long as the older/injured lion can breed, his genes MAY be better than any young pretender, even if his current PHYSICAL fitness isn’t.
The more I look at genetics, the more it looks like the genes use the organism as vehicle, rather than the organism uses the genes. For example. The only real reason an alpha male would kill the cubs of his predecessor is to ensure his genes go on into infinity, & not the other guys. It’s not as ridiculous as it first sounds. Consider, this gene has been able to affect lion behaviour so that his genes go through to the next round. His offspring also have that gene (half of them anyway), he is a dominant male, so his offspring should also be fit, & the males stand a good a chance as any to get to the alpha position. Now, the gene makes sure no other cubs survive except his own. This gene has devised a way to get itself fixed into the general lion population much faster than by NS alone, at the EXPENSE of other members of the species, & at the potential EXPENSE of the lion population as a whole.
quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:

mark said:
Lastly, I'm not sure what conclusion you are going to draw because lion behavior hasn't been studied to this degree.
Redstang said :
Well, I think this behavior is apparent in many animals other than lions. (someone else pointed that out as well.) I don't think studying the animals now would help much to find out how it happened long ago and far away.
mark said :
If you are hoping that you can say "Godidit" because science hasn't specifically studied this aspect of behaviour, then it's a God of the gaps argument.
Redstang said :
I'd have to disagree, I believe that science has studied this extensively because otherwise how would we know about it?
Of course I can say this is definatly evidence of "design" or a preprogram from my point of view. But I'm not exactly sure how anyone can look at this example and not see it as evidence of a designer. I'm also not sure how anyone could say it's even feasible for purely natural selection to explain such an event. I'm satisfied to finish this thread on the note that by your point of view it is unknown. I can only hope that this may plant a seeds in some unbelievers mind that will eventually help to convinced them.

That infanticide happens in animals is known, but has the reason why? If you think it has, then by all means, please produce the paper/study. If you can’t do that, then I put it to you that it hasn’t.
If you can produce a study, then you have probably answered your own question far better than I!
quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:

Of course I can say this is definatly evidence of "design" or a preprogram from my point of view. But I'm not exactly sure how anyone can look at this example and not see it as evidence of a designer. I'm also not sure how anyone could say it's even feasible for purely natural selection to explain such an event. I'm satisfied to finish this thread on the note that by your point of view it is unknown. I can only hope that this may plant a seeds in some unbelievers mind that will eventually help to convinced them.

That Lions exhibit this behaviour is neither evidence for an ID or NS.
No one is saying it’s the product of NS alone.
Mark
------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 2:47 PM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by redstang281, posted 02-13-2002 9:16 PM mark24 has replied

Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5873 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 50 of 67 (4278)
02-12-2002 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by redstang281
02-12-2002 4:41 PM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
So are we done fella's?

Nope. I'll get back to you tomorrow. Right now is coming up on midnight local and I want to get some sleep. G'night...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 4:41 PM redstang281 has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 67 (4283)
02-12-2002 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by redstang281
02-12-2002 3:17 PM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
Oh, and BTW even if I *was* wrong about the TOE you better not come on here and attack me for being ignorant of it when many of you on here are completly ignorant of the correct representation of the Bible and even many creationist theories. Seems pretty critical to me.
Really I thought this was evolution v`s creation not bible study monthly hence precisely the place where I should point out that your idea of what ToE postulates makes you look ridiculous......
And which correct representation of the bible would that be? a)That of the single largest christian sect? b)Or the one dogmatically adhered to by a small but vocal minority here in the states?
If a) then your bible had better have a picture of an old Polish guy who lives in Rome in it......
If b) what makes 40 million smarter than about 3.6 billion?
It is critical, if you don`t like it stop posting asinine misstatements of the oppositions position or grow some thicker skin......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 3:17 PM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by KingPenguin, posted 02-12-2002 11:04 PM joz has replied
 Message 58 by redstang281, posted 02-13-2002 4:47 PM joz has replied

KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7884 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 52 of 67 (4322)
02-12-2002 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by joz
02-12-2002 5:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
Really I thought this was evolution v`s creation not bible study monthly hence precisely the place where I should point out that your idea of what ToE postulates makes you look ridiculous......
And which correct representation of the bible would that be? a)That of the single largest christian sect? b)Or the one dogmatically adhered to by a small but vocal minority here in the states?
If a) then your bible had better have a picture of an old Polish guy who lives in Rome in it......
If b) what makes 40 million smarter than about 3.6 billion?
It is critical, if you don`t like it stop posting asinine misstatements of the oppositions position or grow some thicker skin......

im gonna be an jerk all the time to you joz, just for saying that last bit.
a)thats a pretty dumb statement, moron!!!
b)well gee, were not starving, we read, we go to school, we go to college, we have jobs, we have time to devote ourselves to faith in Christ, we dont have diseases; were america, you should know that were better than everyone. The bible is subject to your own intreptation and generally follows the religion your in, however some like me have different opinions on faith as whole. i dont see church as anything other than a way to make yourself feel better, but i need that every so often. also all i can say evolutionists is that your lucky this isnt a few hundred years ago, you all would be shunned, stoned, completely ignored, and probably killed for most of the crap you guys say; and i would be much more respected for being a guy and white, not any of the bs that some african-americans are pulling: "you enslaved and then freed us... boohooo' we want large sums of money or else we wont stop whining", bah ill enslave you again.
discrimation and reverse-discrimination suck ass, later.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 5:47 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 11:37 PM KingPenguin has replied
 Message 61 by nator, posted 02-13-2002 7:33 PM KingPenguin has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 67 (4337)
02-12-2002 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by KingPenguin
02-12-2002 11:04 PM


quote:
Originally posted by KingPenguin:
1)im gonna be an jerk all the time to you joz, just for saying that last bit.
a)thats a pretty dumb statement, moron!!!
b)well gee, were not starving, we read, we go to school, we go to college, we have jobs, we have time to devote ourselves to faith in Christ, we dont have diseases; were america, you should know that were better than everyone. The bible is subject to your own intreptation and generally follows the religion your in, however some like me have different opinions on faith as whole. i dont see church as anything other than a way to make yourself feel better, but i need that every so often.
2)also all i can say evolutionists is that your lucky this isnt a few hundred years ago, you all would be shunned, stoned, completely ignored, and probably killed for most of the crap you guys say; and i would be much more respected for being a guy and white, not any of the bs that some african-americans are pulling: "you enslaved and then freed us... boohooo' we want large sums of money or else we wont stop whining", bah ill enslave you again.
discrimation and reverse-discrimination suck ass, later.

1)Oh dear what shall I do KP is going to bad to me....
a)Any idea who that Polish fella is pal? the head of the worlds single largest religion thats who.....
b)Wrong you are a vocal MINORITY in america.....
2)Whats this some sort of if I ran the world wish list? Grow up....
Would you like a chip for your other shoulder....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by KingPenguin, posted 02-12-2002 11:04 PM KingPenguin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by lbhandli, posted 02-12-2002 11:45 PM joz has not replied
 Message 55 by KingPenguin, posted 02-12-2002 11:47 PM joz has replied

lbhandli
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 67 (4339)
02-12-2002 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by joz
02-12-2002 11:37 PM


Why don't you move this to a new thread. I would appreciate it and maybe you could make a strong case instead of taunting him. Thanks,
Larry

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 11:37 PM joz has not replied

KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7884 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 55 of 67 (4340)
02-12-2002 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by joz
02-12-2002 11:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
1)Oh dear what shall I do KP is going to bad to me....
a)Any idea who that Polish fella is pal? the head of the worlds single largest religion thats who.....
b)Wrong you are a vocal MINORITY in america.....
2)Whats this some sort of if I ran the world wish list? Grow up....
Would you like a chip for your other shoulder....

a)im not in the worlds largest religion, and the downfall of catholics is there government. they have to many people ruling and they blur the image of christ and the message of the bible. you connection to god should be direct, not through a line of nobles. most people only declare there faith in god during church and that isnt letting christ know that you love him and have faith in him for saving your soul from eternal damnation.
b)thats what i was rambling on about, it was just recently that society accepted science this much, i was just saying your lucky of your freedom of speech, just as i am.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 11:37 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 11:57 PM KingPenguin has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 67 (4343)
02-12-2002 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by KingPenguin
02-12-2002 11:47 PM


Understood I was merely pointing out that the largest christian (largest full stop actually) sect in the world is catholisism.... Thus more people believe in that particular interpretation than any other...
By the way did you check out the proof of 1+1=2 yet? it has its own thread....
take a look if you haven`t you never know when it may come in handy....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by KingPenguin, posted 02-12-2002 11:47 PM KingPenguin has not replied

Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5873 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 57 of 67 (4368)
02-13-2002 4:28 AM


I guess I made it too easy the first time around.
quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
So you believe the lion has an instinct to kill only cubs he does not recognize. What I want to know is how this instinct developed without the lion going through a stage where he killed every cub?
There are a few things you are apparently unfamiliar with re: lions. Perhaps if I explain a bit more about the details of this behavior, maybe you'll be able to figure out why it might have developed.
I. What is a pride?
- lions are the most sexually dimorphic of all cats
- lions are extremely territorial due to limited resources in their particular environment
- African lions (Panthera leo) are a social species, forming a pride of up to ten+ animals
- prides consist of a group of closely-related females (mothers, daughters, sisters, nieces, etc.)
- the pride also consists of a small group of resident males - two or three is the usual number
- the males are usually related to each other but not related to the females
- this situation arises because females reaching sexual maturity remain in the pride where they were born whereas males must leave the pride upon maturity. These males form "coalitions" for survival.
- Most solitary males do not survive to reproduce because of both inefficient solitary hunting techniques and inability to takeover an existing pride
II. Lion reproductive biology
- female lions have synchronous estrus (all females in a pride come in to estrus at roughly the same time)
- it takes an average of 5 estrus cycles to produce one litter
- females (other things being equal) come into estrus once every two years
- cubs remain "immature" (i.e., cubs) for 3 (female) or 4 (male) years
- average life expectancy is 8-10 years
III. Male takeover
- males must fight and defeat the group of resident males in order to gain control of the pride. These battles will often result in severe wounding or even death for both participants.
- the average time that male lions maintain control of a pride is only about 2 years.
- because residence in the pride is the key to reproductive success of male lions, they quickly begin trying to father cubs.
- one impediment to quick fatherhood is the presence of still-nursing cubs, because females do not return to breeding condition until their cubs are weaned.
- male lions overcome this problem by killing ANY cubs in the pride that are not weaned.
- this strategy results in females returning to breeding condition an average of 8 months earlier than they otherwise would.
- about 25% of all cub mortality in the first year is caused by infanticide and about 10% of overall lion mortality.
- once a pride is taken over, coalition males rarely if ever fight amongst themselves. All females are shared.
In other words, infanticide takes place because male lion coalitions have a very limited time to reproduce and simply can't wait for a normal estrus cycle - especially with all the females in a given pride entering estrus at roughly the same time.
Why don't females defend their cubs? They do, occasionally. However, unlike most solitary species, there is a net negative opportunity cost: males will just as quickly kill a recalcitrant female as they will cubs. The "fight-to-the-death" option is seldom exercised. If you'd like more information, see this article for a lot of good information on lion behavior.
I hope this answers your quibble.

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by redstang281, posted 02-13-2002 9:13 PM Quetzal has not replied

redstang281
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 67 (4420)
02-13-2002 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by joz
02-12-2002 5:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
Really I thought this was evolution v`s creation not bible study monthly hence precisely the place
And I will save this quote for the very next time I see someone attacking the Bible.
[b] [QUOTE] where I should point out that your idea of what ToE postulates makes you look ridiculous......[/b][/QUOTE]
I must confess I'm unimpressed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by joz, posted 02-12-2002 5:47 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by joz, posted 02-13-2002 4:54 PM redstang281 has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 67 (4422)
02-13-2002 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by redstang281
02-13-2002 4:47 PM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
I must confess I'm unimpressed.
Ok provide reference to a paper by a credible author that claims all lifes common ancestor is a rock.....
If you can`t it seems fairly ridiculous to claim that evolution claims so.....
[This message has been edited by joz, 02-13-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by redstang281, posted 02-13-2002 4:47 PM redstang281 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 67 (4439)
02-13-2002 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by redstang281
02-12-2002 2:09 PM


quote:
Oh, in the future please create a new thread for the contradiction assumptions. I think the "is the bible the word of God" thread is getting a little thick.
Excellent suggestion, will do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by redstang281, posted 02-12-2002 2:09 PM redstang281 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024