Originally posted by dkv:
So you mean to say that evolution process has no goal?!!
In that case the whole meaning of existence reduces to meaningless (or rather a goaless) struggle for survival between species....
We have already reached at the top of the food chain and we have also reached at a threshold of environmental food chain disaster...
Such is the condition that we manufacture some of the species for our food ....e.g Chicken
Finding Chicken in wild is wild dream .. atleast for me...
So species have vanished before and how many will ...but the question is do we need prevent this vanishing act ...
to put it simply I would like to ask can we prevent the cataclysmic downfall of our species ?
How has the reduction in Whale number affected our chances of survival in say next 1000 years..?
What kind of role the population of Human species will play in our chances of survival ?these are important issues because
I feel that the chain of destruction has its own inertia...and therefore we must understand and act before it is too late...
dkv, you are not talking about evolution. Perhaps there is a language barrier; to a scientist, the word "evolution" refers to the process by which groups of organisms change over the course of many generations. Evolution has nothing to do with solving the world's problems.
Instead of evolution, I think you are speaking of what, in English, we might call "human destiny".
As several others have pointed out, the process of evolution is not guided in any particular direction or by any particular goal. Overall, evolution does not even represent progress.
A couple more observations: 1, to say that long life is a goal of natural selection is to fail, utterly, to understand even the most basic of Darwinian thinking. And 2, wild chickens do still exist; the southeast asian species
Gallus gallus, known in English as the "Red Jungle Fowl" is unquestionably the most recent ancestor of domestic chickens. In fact, domestic chickens will readily breed with wild jungle fowl.
