Even the idea that there's an objective definition of "detrimental" and "beneficial" that stays consistent over time is obviously projecting our values onto the uncaring universe
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
Evolution is only even *possible* because there's a certain baseline level of diversity in alleles made possible by ongoing random mutations that stick around for long periods of time
1 reply 2 retweets 29 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
People get the timescale twisted in their heads, like the existence of the allele has to happen well before the actual event causing selection happens If it didn't happen until then it would be too late, there'd be nothing to select
1 reply 1 retweet 24 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
This concept was mocked by anti-Darwinians as "hopeful monsters" because, again, they didn't grasp the timescale involved (a fish egg hatches a lizard that starts to drown but makes it to land just time?!?)
1 reply 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
But that's what most mutations are like Oh, some humans are melanin deficient, and that's bad because skin cancer, but it's also kind of good because vitamin D, so it's a wash People start living indoors most of the time and skin cancer is now rare? Hey awesome
1 reply 1 retweet 23 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Woman4W @arthur_affect and
Chemo has not existed on evolutionarily relevant timescales.
3 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @LizardOrman @Woman4W and
And neither did vitamin D supplements, although the need to consume vitamin-D-rich foods like dairy to stay healthy is theorized to be why white people evolved lactose tolerance
1 reply 0 retweets 22 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @LizardOrman and
But to be serious about it for a second, even pale people who've spent most of their lives working outdoors in the sun rarely get skin cancer early enough that it affects their chance at having kids From an evolutionary standpoint that's all that matters
3 replies 0 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @LizardOrman and
Like, the reason getting old sucks and "diseases of aging" (including the steadily increasing risk of getting cancer in general as you age) is that there's no selection pressure against it If you live long enough to pop out kids that's good enough
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Evolution doesn't care at all if your old age is horrible and debilitating, or whether you live for fifty more years after your kids are born or you immediately drop dead once they're old enough to feed themselves As long as you passed on your genes they're "good" genes
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @LizardOrman and
There’s something to be said for social animals selecting for somewhat longer lives so non-reproductive members can help raise offspring, but having old people is certainly not the only solution too that pressure
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.