What has DNA testing added to the speculation that gorillas and chimpanzees are my relatives? Lets agree that a relative is one who shares genetic material. On this subject, does anyone know what would happen if human sperm were injected into a fertile female ape? Im only asking...
Highly unlikely, as this would require some way to prevent virtually every aspect of nature from doing what it was designed to do. However, it would even then, not prevent radiation exposure due to the simple fact the organism itself must be the source of said radiation. The exposure would come from within.
Rats and roaches can survive 100x the amount of radiation that it would take to kill a human thus if evolution were actually a plausible theory we should have nuclear powered roaches with laser eyes...........but we don't. Instead we just get the lame ass ones that don't do anything cool.
Given the size constraints created by insect respiration, as well as internal radiation impacts such an adaptation would likely be self defeating and thus a dead end within evolutionary mutations. One must consider the initial mutations required that might lead to something using nuclear fission as a source of energy going back billions of years. The radiation would have destroyed the DNA long before replication could take place in the early organism....ending the entire process before it could adapt.
Size isn't so much an issue. Even if roaches were too small there is no reason that we couldn't have giant ass dinosours or elephants or whales which are HUGE with nuclear power and laser eyes. They don't even have be powered by nuclear energy since there are chemical lasers powered by batteries and we have a real life creature existing today that has natural batteries.......the incredibly lame and boring electric eel. If evolution were a viable theory then it must follow that after BILLIONS of years there should be some sort of giant lizard that stores energy in its body like the lame electric eel and then would release it in an awesome display of photonic glory and precision with its natural chemical eye lasers and burn a whole straight through its preys brain. No risk of injury taking down the prey manually, don't have to out run them since nothing outruns the speed of light and its freaking laser eyes. But people want to keep blindly following the whole evolution and life forms adapt to their surroundings poppycock even though the evidence is missing right in front of them.
Environmental conditions during the last epoch seem to have limited the size of animal life on this planet, and ended the time of "Giant" animals on land. Adaptation to this new reality by species have allowed few large animals to exist outside the oceans ...however light is diffused in water and a laser would become ineffectual over any distance. Had the mammals that became whales over time developed Nuclear energy as a biological source, they would have lost the laser eyes over time when becoming aquatic, just as they did legs.
actually, if you look into the evidence. When dinosaurs (big azz lizards) roamed, the atmosphere was in the 35% oxygen range. (now about 21%) I suggest a solar flare hit the earth during a pole reversal (no magnetosphere) and the high H content of the mass ejection from the sun, hit the oxygen rich atmosphere and practically detonated (burned the surface, flooded the lands, increased the ocean levels and reduced the oxygen of the atmosphere). Each in the parenthesis are the evidence and my claim is what could have caused it. oooops..... i forgot to mention, that (perhaps) the reason the birds did so well (survived) is many have the chambered lung system, for high altitude flying (migrations), so they could SURVIVE the lowered oxygen levels of the atmosphere Could that fit as to why we dont have the BIG BIG land critters anymore?
what about sharks with fricken lazer beams? [video=youtube;Bh7bYNAHXxw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bh7bYNAHXxw[/video]
And one reason why Anoles and Cichlids have hundreds of species vs. human's one species is that they reproduce at such a high rate compared to humans that 50-100 generations could fit in a human lifespan thus changes in the genome happen faster.
If an animal was nuclear powered, why would it need laser eyes? It doesn't have to hunt, it's nuclear powered. Also, for protection, all it has to do is take a dump, the radioactive waste would have a much bigger kill zone than a laser and you wouldn't have to aim. Ok, so let's say we have a dinosaur sized animal that has enough natural batteries to create the megawatts of energy to create a deadly laser to kill prey, why would it? It would be horribly inefficient. The amount of energy required to kill an animal with a laser would barely cover the energy input of the animal being eaten (if at all). Miss one time, and you starve to death since you wouldn't have enough energy to fire another shot. Hunting and killing prey physically is much more efficient. I've never understood why if someone can't explain something themselves, instead of researching the topic and figuring it out, they just assume that science is wrong.
The nuclear power or the "batteries" would be for the laser only. It would still need the proteins and componets for cell construction. Also, you don't need megwatts of power for a laser to be deadly. Here is a mere 4.4 watts laser. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge8pMg33bq4 The the Lazzard (copyrighted) wouldn't even necessarily have to generated enough to burn a whole through the preys brain or heart, although that would be the coolest way, all it would need is a laser powerful enough to blind the prey so that it coulnd't see. Then it could just attack the prey at whim or even just wait till it was weakened from hunger after a few days. Its also useful for prey because if they saw the predator first they could use their lasers to blind the predator. This is assuming that some of the animals don't have a protective filter that evolves of course. Once the first animal develops lasers which is only logical then most of you other lifeforms would follow suit or become extincted. If evolution were an actual plausible theory instead of wild fantasy derived from a Dr Seuss book then we should see alot of lifeforms with laser eyes.
I lifeform with a nuclear power source would be more like a plant than an animal. Plants use solar energy rather than nuclear, but the concept is similar. They don't have to hunt, they get whatever minerals and proteins they need from the soil. But the real issue again is efficiency. Lasers are not an efficient use of energy. Take that 4.4 laser in the video and try to kill a cockroach with it and I'll step on it and we'll see which one uses the most energy. And not only do you have to power the laser, but you have to power the cells that support the laser. That energy could be used elsewhere, like a brain that could think up a way to create a laser. Natural selection will always try the easiest, simplest most efficient way to do something. It is not going to create lasers when teeth and claws work just fine. Natural selection is not about making the perfect organism, it is about passing genes to the next generation. Please do yourself a favor and get an education. Get your nose out of your Bible and read a science book on evolution, you will be surprised what you will learn.
Why do you infer that I am reading the bible? I said in an earlier post that the lack of lasers or radioactive breath or any really cool powers is proof that neither God nor aliens designed us as who in there right mind would create an organism and not bother to give it lasers. It also just happens to be proof that evolution is also a wild eyed delusional fantasy perpetrated by "big evolution" and their cohorts.
"Big evolution"... excuse me while a stifle a laugh... hmmph... that's better. What the hell is big evolution? You say you do not believe in Intelligent Design/Creationism, Alien Intervention, or Evolution, because... let me get this straight... there are no animals that have "really cool powers"? Really? So how did the multitudes of species of plants and animals get here? Magic? Birthed out of Zeus' head? Pokeballs? Given that your username is a thinly veiled reference to a large phallus, you are obsessed with nuclear powered animals with lasers and are woefully ignorant of science I am going to guess that your age is somewhere in the low teens. Please tell me I'm right because the alternatives are you are either a troll or a sad, pitiful man.
So in other words you have no way of defending against the accusation that evolution is a laughable theory other than to try and attack me. That means that you have lost the argument and I have won. You are nothing more than a hack for big evolution. There is no existing theory that explains why we don't have life forms with nuclear power plants, radioactive breath or laser eyes. All of the existing theories are a complete joke. As for my current theory I believe that it might be possible that all the really cool plants and animals might have cloaking fields that render them invisible to the naked eye. After all we already have chameleons and sea animals like squid that do it and they are just as lame as electric eels. Why not invisible monsters. Makes alot more sense than 3.5 billion years of "well...we tried sorry all the plants and animals suck but that is what you get with random chance." All these ghost and alien sightings might in fact be people catching a glimpse of a giant mutated lizard with radioactive breath and laser eyes when he isn't cloaked for a short time for some reason.
which part? Would the lower oxygen levels of the atmosphere, be a solid cause for whole species to perish, permanant like?
Well you have take in all the factors. High oxygen content slows vegetation, puts pressure on the food chain. The dinosaurs were in trouble for at least 10 million years before the end came. Although bio-mass was being maintained, the bio diversity was crashing. Something was already affecting them. In probability the Deccan traps were screwing with the environment. The big impact wasn't the ultimate cause as more the final kill shot.
And I gave you the answer. Lower oxygen levels are better, not worse for creatures (Insects excluded)
Because oxygen is a metabolizer not a food source. Humans breath out nearly 75% of the oxygen they breath in. Reptile oxygen requirements are even lower. So a sudden drop in atmospheric oxygen is not going to create any long term problems at all
And you still didn't answer any of my questions: 1. What is "big evolution"? 2. How do you think life became so diverse? 3. ... Ok, I'll let this one go so you don't think I am "attacking" you.
