Survival of the Fittest?

Just because the social Darwinists corrupted the idea and used it to justify destroying "primitive" cultures and for doing eugenics, doesn't mean the principle doesn't hold true.

You're right, there is a lot of luck involved. But over the long run, those best adapted to their environment such that they can statistically survive more, WILL survive more. When the climate changes and it gets colder, the foxes with longer denser fur are going to have a higher survival rate than those with shorter, thinner fur (all else being equal, and yes I realize all else is not equal in real life).

 

your missinterperting , it refers to the speices that takes advantage of a particular ecological nich. for there to be an acurate coralation you would need to put bobs and niels on the same island, feeding on the same things, living the same way. In the senario you descibe the bobs would hop in there boats and get the hell out of there, therfor being the most fit to survive.
Or sapose this, the bobs are smarter but cant build boats and the only difference between them and is the neils can fly, so now which is the most fit to survive when the shit hits the fan?
heres an even better senario, during the time the keltic sagas refer to as " the time of the giants" when the arms race between hunter and hunted has brought about monsterous beast. thee comes up a preditor with idealy suited to hunt these monsters, his advantage? a massive brain. now theres a problem with a big brain it, it takes ALOT of power to run, but thats ok because in this case because one kill will give you massive amounts of food. now these fellows do well for 250,000 years or more, spreading aross europe displacing preditors as they go. Then one winter it dosnt stop snowing, it dosnt stop for thousands of years. now with the prey dying off our fellows are forced to live hand to mouth, mindlessly foraging throuout the country side, there power hungry brains are no longer as nesasarry and the ones who require the most energy begin to die off, untill we are left with the most effiient of the species, the smaller ones with the smaller brains. and such is the surviel of the fittest

 

No...I'm not. Folks are saying that by mere survival, a species was necessarily the most fit. That's simply untrue unless the sole criterion for fitness is survival. If that is the sole criterion, then it's tautologous, unscientific, and meaningless.

They were on the same island.

Why?

So if you completely change my example, then your right. Nice.

 

i had put them on the same island, the senerio i was talking about was the thing blowing up
and by "fit" they meen the most suited, not the healthiest,or the strongest, or the smartest, but simply the most fit to survive under a given circumstance. why use the word "fit" you may wonder? i did, and i can see there point, you see life must prevail, has prevailed, whatever form it takes, and too that end those that survive are the most fit

 

oops i just reread, you did put them on the same island, but still there cercumstances where different, one lived in the shadow of the beast, and one lived a nice safe distance, and that was the point i was making

 

I don't know that anyone said it was the sole criterion. But clearly survival rates are going to be important in evolution, because it directly affects reproductive rates (not always, in older animals...but then, those have probably already bred anyways).

But the point HE'S making is that geographical location is another, seperate criterion that is going to figure highly in evolution...and he's right. Species aren't always evenly mixed together. And if we're just considering one species, obviously those closest to the volcano are going to die...even if the healthiest, fittest creatures live there.

 

geographical location is the main factor, and luck is not in natures arsenal. unless you can say it was lucky for the niels and the eco system that niels are afraid of smoking mountains. but it wasnt, the reason there afraid is there ancestors where and all those unfraid get barbaqued. maybe one day when the mountain has cooled and the plants and animals begin to return the niels who are not afraid will move to the side of the mountain, and they will look at the old niels and say man are they stupid, its so much better to live here, we are not that stupid so we must not be niels

 

There's no luck in nature? That's a laugh. Rock slides, avalanches, tornados, ice storms, etc can kill very randomly. Haven't you ever heard of a really smart person getting killed by a drunk driver? Shit happens, man, it's the same in nature.

 

that is nature, and the species on this planet survive these things, or perish

 

It is lucky an asteroid hasnt smacked this planet so hard it killed it i rekon

 

There is no creationism. There is no evolution. There are only the species that Chuck Norris has allowed to survive.

 

lol