Daniel Erickson

The theory of evolution is one of the main buttresses of skepticism, since it offers an alternative to the theistic argument from design. However, evolutionary theory has a number of holes. For example:

(1) The theory of evolution is stumped by the existence of symbiotic relationships. There is the well-known case of bees and flowers. Bees need flowers for their nectar; flowers need bees to reproduce. No flowers, no bees. No bees, no flowers. Which came first, bees or flowers ? If bees came first, how did they survive before flowers appeared ? If flowers came first, how did they reproduce before bees appeared ?

(2) How did animals' seeming psychic abilities evolve ? Certain sea turtles travel to the exact same nesting spots, on the exact same little islands, year after year. They do this by swimming across vast ocean distances, all the while barely able to see over the waves. How did this amazing ability evolve from nowhere ?

(3) How on earth did animal migration habits evolve ? Each summer, the Texas Ruby-throated Hummingbird beins to gorge its little body, in preparation for its arduous fall migration to its South American wintering nests. Who told this bird it should fatten itself ? The first hummingbird to attempt this migration would not have known to gorge itself beforehand, and would have fallen exhauted into the Caribbean. And how did the first Hummingbird know it should migrate at all ? How did such behavior evolve ?

gravitybow

Man, you're off to a rocky start when the first half of the first sentence of your first post isn't even correct.

Welcome to the forum, Daniel Erickson.

Daniel Erickson

A slow start but a fast finish.... At least I know better than to post personal attacks on this forum.....

gravitybow

No personal attack or offense intended.
The first sentence is false.

RRoman

How was that a personal attack? He pointed out an error. The Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with skepticism. The Theory of Evolution explains the diversity of life and the changing and devlopment of new species, whereas skepticism is "A doubting or questioning attitude or state of mind"

Kuu

Aren't they just returning to the place where they were born? They swam away from it while young and the route to and from it implanted in their brain? If the island concerned sank below the sea tomorrow, the returning turtle would go off and find a new island to breed on and then their young would return to the new island each year?

And maybe they navigate by features on the ocean floor or by the stars so not being able to see much above the waves doesn't matter.

Dr Rick

How does Complexity Arise in Evolution

Hit the link for a nice pdf.

Also, see this site for a great review of the evidence of evolution.

Welcome to the IIDB fora, Daniel Erickson.

RRoman

Read "Climbing Mount Improbable" by Richard Dawkins. It devotes an entire chapter to the development of symbiotic relationships, some going even further than that of bees.

Since I read it quite some time ago and it migh not apply here I will attempt to explain it how I think it would happen. Keep in mind that I'm only 16 an dhave absolutely no further studies in biology than my high school education, so this all is just an educated guess until an expert on this board answers these questions.

Anyway, I would think that the plant before bees would use wind pollination. Some insects would find the pollen to be a rather good food source and fly from flower to flower eating the pollen or whatever. By accident, some of the insects would have some pollen rubbed off on them and carry it to the next plant, which would get pollinated and reproduce. The plants that were more likely to rub pollen onto the insect would reproduce more, and thus replace the plant that relied on inefficient wind pollination. Et voila, we have a proto-symbiotic relationship.

Keep in mind, I might be totally wrong about this, as I am only giving an educated guess.

Roland98

Good answer RRoman. The entire premise of the question was flawed, as it assumes that all flowers must have insects in order for pollination to occur. Of course, this is not true.

RufusAtticus

No it is not. I suggest that you do a scientific literature search on "evolution AND symbiosis."

Neither of these two statements are true. Most flowers are not bee polinated and there are bees that don't rely on nectar.

Wind is one way for example. Actually the fossil evidence suggests that the first flowers were eaten by beetles which dispersed the pollen as they ate the petals.

Whoever said it evolved from nowhere? Perhaps you should familarize yourself with what evolution actually is so you won't be arguing against a strawman.

No one, since last I loooked birds weren't good at following orders.

And you know this how? The gorging behavior could have evolved before the migratory behavior, or they didn't migrate as far until the gorging behavior evolved.

Who said the first Hummingbird was a migrant?