Head binding now and the past

[Anomalocaris]

No, you misunderstand.  it is a matter of theoretical possibility.  The tail needs to provide an evolutionary advantage to offset the energy cost of growing one in order to remain a feature of the gene pool, as it no doubt tails of mice provides in mice whose tail is not cut off.  

But in mice whose tail is cut off, the amputated tail no longer provides its original advantage.   so investment of energy required to grow one in the first place is in effect wasted.   so if you cut off the tail of every mouse, then natural selection will now favor mouse whose genes invest less in the futile effort to grow a tail that will be cut off.    because animals that waste less energy on fruitless investments tend to be able to invest more in more rewarding investments.

[highdimensionman]

You guys are applying evolution theory to the process and ignoring some big white elephants. like the difference between attacking an organism and trying to benefit an organism like say some of that head binding was useful to human evolution what then and of course not enough is actually known about the long term generational  mechanical stem cell affects. When you replace someones bone marrow or blood this could be seen by the body as an attack and therefore the next sperm and egg is protected by the immune system. If instead of attacking you are a bug or effect that is beneficial to the host then how DNA adapts if at all is a huge unknown white elephant.

[The Grand Nudger]

It doesn't matter whether head binding is useful to people. Binding heads won't make us evolve bound heads. It's a process applied after the fact of our birth that is not heritable. Same reason you had to get shots even though your parents already had theirs.

[arewethereyet]

Following this thought....considering all the people over the years that have pierced ears...why haven't we evolved to simply be born with pierced ears?

[Anomalocaris]

You guys are applying evolution theory to the process and ignoring some big white elephants. like the difference between attacking an organism and trying to benefit an organism like say some of that head binding was useful to human evolution what then and of course not enough is actually known about the long term generational  mechanical stem cell affects. When you replace someones bone marrow or blood this could be seen by the body as an attack and therefore the next sperm and egg is protected by the immune system. If instead of attacking you are a bug or effect that is beneficial to the host then how DNA adapts if at all is a huge unknown white elephant.

Your determination to associate two concepts that have no underlying mechanical linkage, despite the fact that the new mechanisms operating was each has been explained to you by several people in this thread several times, suggest you are emotionally attached to your misconceptions being true, and are not at all interested in any rigorous examination of whether it could possibly be true or not.

[highdimensionman]

It doesn't matter whether head binding is useful to people.  Binding heads won't make us evolve bound heads.  It's a process applied after the fact of our birth that is not heritable.  Same reason you had to get shots even though your parents already had theirs.

You do have to get shots yes but natural immunity can be passed on or else we would all be dropping dead from old bacteria and viruses lingering around. Shots can affect natural immunity so yet another grey area considered a black and white issue.

[highdimensionman]

You guys are applying evolution theory to the process and ignoring some big white elephants. like the difference between attacking an organism and trying to benefit an organism like say some of that head binding was useful to human evolution what then and of course not enough is actually known about the long term generational  mechanical stem cell affects. When you replace someones bone marrow or blood this could be seen by the body as an attack and therefore the next sperm and egg is protected by the immune system. If instead of attacking you are a bug or effect that is beneficial to the host then how DNA adapts if at all is a huge unknown white elephant.

Your determination to associate two concepts that have no underlying mechanical linkage, despite the fact that the new mechanisms operating was each has been explained to you by several people in this thread several times, suggest you are emotionally attached to your misconceptions being true, and are not at all interested in any rigorous examination of whether it could possibly be true or not.

The 2 concepts positive stem cell manipulation and effects on offspring over 10's of thousands of generations. So that's just a plane no such things don't connect what rigorous examination all I hear is talk of advantages and natural selection about mouse tails a negative act in many cases that natural section would fight to some degree. I didn't even say natural selection wouldn't play it's role. Just because the amount of new dust adding to the earths surface is subtle and the effect of plate tectonics is more obvious doesn't mean one should discard further analysis on how the earth might have grown. Just because universal expansion is a dominant fit for now doesn't mean we should ignore alternative models which might help explain other components of the gathered real world data. It's like forest gump put it 2 things can be true at the same time there is no ultimate theory to everything and the best fit theory may miss subtleties. Evolution is a best fit model so to is the big bang theory and plate tectonics's however none of these theories are the full or absolute truth so people shouldn't get so religious about such theories as if they are gospel these theories are simply a best fit for now.

[Anomalocaris]

making shit up does not make our understanding any better than what is provided by the imperfect theories.

[highdimensionman]

making shit up does not make our understanding any better than what is provided by the imperfect theories.

Until someone makes something up that is a better fit yes I know the very dismissive scientific method to anyone without a piece of paper and many with a piece of paper society tell this world about that falier to communicate how brilliant you are for having a piece of paper and sticking by the consensus never daring to step from the crib held by the shoulders of giants. With this stature vs real science issue it's only going to get worse. If we are to keep up with machine intelligence in the future we will need to be more creative and explore with a wider range of creative approaches to deal with incompleteness of it all.
Making shit up is exactly what we need to help. Much stuff made up will be inadequate but some critical reasoning and further research will improve the situation.

[Angrboda]

Wow. How did you get so fucked up?