Just because it causes evolution still doesn't mean it's good... what if it causes fish to evolve to be inedible by a predator, then the predator dies and the population of this fish skyrockets? Or something.

Well then some other predator would have to evolve to be able to eat the fish.

Humans are absolutely messing with the natural processes of evolution, and not just by polluting. And yeah, evolution is not inherently good, so I don't think we should keep polluting in the hopes of creating carp that can swim in uranium, even for experimentation's sake.

You can't really mess with a processes thats driven by cataclysm.

If you create the cataclysm you're part of the process.

Also I think a fish that could survive with heavy radiation and almost no oxygen would be cool.

Before humans came along, evolution was guided by chance, with any cataclysms being naturally created. Now that we can consciously affect our environment, evolution's products actually have some control over it, and we can be said to have transcended blind chance. I would not be surprised if we have affected more changes in our biosphere than we can even begin to guess.

whats wrong with that?

It's like a tiny step towards being gods.

Just because it causes evolution still doesn't mean it's good... what if it causes fish to evolve to be inedible by a predator, then the predator dies and the population of this fish skyrockets? Or something.

Well then some other predator would have to evolve to be able to eat the fish.

Not really, at least according to Darwin's theory of evolution. Changes in species are driven by the need to survive; the ones that can best survive survive and reproduce, and so on. So unless a species is forced to eat these fish to survive, and then the ones that can best eat them continue on through generations until it just becomes the way they survive and they're now a predator of the first kind of fish I mentioned, or a new species is introduced somehow, then Fish Type 1's population will stay really high. I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Just because it causes evolution still doesn't mean it's good... what if it causes fish to evolve to be inedible by a predator, then the predator dies and the population of this fish skyrockets? Or something.

Well then some other predator would have to evolve to be able to eat the fish.

Not really, at least according to Darwin's theory of evolution. Changes in species are driven by the need to survive; the ones that can best survive survive and reproduce, and so on. So unless a species is forced to eat these fish to survive, and then the ones that can best eat them continue on through generations until it just becomes the way they survive and they're now a predator of the first kind of fish I mentioned, or a new species is introduced somehow, then Fish Type 1's population will stay really high. I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Well I was playing on what you said about the frist fish being the only kind of fish they can eat but other wise you're right.

Before humans came along, evolution was guided by chance, with any cataclysms being naturally created. Now that we can consciously affect our environment, evolution's products actually have some control over it, and we can be said to have transcended blind chance. I would not be surprised if we have affected more changes in our biosphere than we can even begin to guess.

whats wrong with that?

 

 

It's like a tiny step towards being gods.

And you think this is a good thing, with all the faults of the human race?

Well, seeing as evolution doesn't exist; I'm going to say no. But if it did, I'd say maybe.

Before humans came along, evolution was guided by chance, with any cataclysms being naturally created. Now that we can consciously affect our environment, evolution's products actually have some control over it, and we can be said to have transcended blind chance. I would not be surprised if we have affected more changes in our biosphere than we can even begin to guess.

whats wrong with that?

 

 

It's like a tiny step towards being gods.

And you think this is a good thing, with all the faults of the human race?

Most human gods ain't too nice

Also what about breading dogs? We changed them a lot in just 10,000 years.

You're all being too serious about this.

You're all being too serious about this.

So extinction doesn't alter the course of things?

I'm not saying we didn't kill stuff off, since we did, I'm just saying we're not quite the big deals we always make ourselves out to be. Yes, we've caused some species to alter, but, FOR THE MOST PART, it hasn't been that major. Mainly aesthetics (cats, dogs, Norwegian Black Rats, etc.)

Everything starts small.

You're all being too serious about this.

Not evolution, more mutation.

While Mutation can be a form of evolution, it would have to be far more widespread. Once all of our bodies have reached max of chemical intake we may see some sort of consistent mutation/evolution.

Also Lawlz I be srs. Or something equally as inane.

-Janus

Animals will adapt. However, if they are faced with too many problems, they won't be able to adapt, and then they will die.

We should just stop polluting and leave it up to nature.