Re: Ears under pressure. Was Re: Aquatic ape theory
Phillip Bigelow (n8010095@cc.wwu.edu)
8 Nov 1995 16:19:46 -0800
hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu (H. M. Hubey) writes:
James wrote:
>>2) Bacteria are far more efficient than humans at converting raw
>>materials into biomass, therefore they are more highly evolved. They can
>>also survive in a much wider range of extreme environments.
hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu responded:
>None of this has anything to do with complexity.
It does if you view "complexity" as a whole-istic entity. Complexity can
be defined a multitide of ways, which, as is the case with
"evolutionary-direction", is essentially meaningless.
You just put ONE criterium as the definition for "complexity": our large
brains. That has an ominous tone of the Old Testament view of man as the
"apex" of what life is all about. Fine. I choose a more technical
definition: one that embraces adaptation, geological longevity, species
diversity, structural apomorphies, how many niches a species can fill, etc.
hubey continues:
>And what of converting energy? What does it have to do with
>complexity?
Have you ever looked at the number of chemical steps there are during the
process of photosynthesis?
<pb>
|