We are more hostile to ugly raccoons and more often helpful to cute ones. This isn’t evolution, it’s selective extinction based on cuteness, would be my guess. One example of the power humans have in shaping the natural world around what our emotions tell us to.
Yeah, I don’t think racoons are anywhere near going extinct…They’re really well adapted to living on the fringes of human society
Also, it’s not just preference. Cuter is less threatening, and for the noble North American trash panda? Convincing humans to help them escape dumpsters is practically part of their life cycle
Nah, when animals go from feeding themselves to being fed by humans and from living in wild habitats to human environments, their bodies do not need the adaptations they had, and instead are pressured towards new ones that are similar to our pets because they experience similar evolutionary pressures as our pets.
Raccoons are simply going thorough the same changes that our pets already went through when they were domesticated. It’s not that raccoons are looking more like our pets, it’s that both raccoons and our pets are looking less like themselves and more like “domesticated”, and our pets are further ahead on this transition.
Humans having a proclivity towards “cute” animals is as much an evolved trait as animals becoming “cuter” to better adapt to presence.
Hell, for that matter, it isn’t just us that have a proclivity towards “cuteness”. It exists in plenty of species, we just tend to be the ones most prone to it outside of very similar species.
It is absolutely evolution because it isn’t selective.
I think the hangup is thinking evolution can’t proceed quickly. We were taught in school that evolution take millions of years and we resist the idea that it can move quickly.
We’ve been figuring out over the last two decades that evolution can move fast, given enough selective pressure.
Arguing with a reasonalbe Christian on reddit 10-years back; Said African elephants were growing smaller, or no tusks, in response to poaching. He called it “breeding”. I call it hella selective pressure. Same difference?
The example of elephants producing less ivory for us to poach is unintentional selective breeding, yeah. Evolution works way faster when directed by an intelligence than when it’s left up to a relatively stable environment, simply because we exert more pressure for change.
i think also the concept of “survival of the fittest” was like an alpha thing; who fought nature and won. versus fittest being more about fitting into the environment better. the best fit for the specific environment.
We are more hostile to ugly raccoons and more often helpful to cute ones. This isn’t evolution, it’s selective extinction based on cuteness, would be my guess. One example of the power humans have in shaping the natural world around what our emotions tell us to.
I’m curious: what do you think evolution is?
Yeah, I don’t think racoons are anywhere near going extinct…They’re really well adapted to living on the fringes of human society
Also, it’s not just preference. Cuter is less threatening, and for the noble North American trash panda? Convincing humans to help them escape dumpsters is practically part of their life cycle
As long as whatever trait it’s based on is heritable, that’s evolution.
There is no such thing as an ugly raccoon.
You could argue whether or not it’s “natural” selection but it’s still evolution.
that is what evoulution is, internet friend.
Nah, when animals go from feeding themselves to being fed by humans and from living in wild habitats to human environments, their bodies do not need the adaptations they had, and instead are pressured towards new ones that are similar to our pets because they experience similar evolutionary pressures as our pets.
Raccoons are simply going thorough the same changes that our pets already went through when they were domesticated. It’s not that raccoons are looking more like our pets, it’s that both raccoons and our pets are looking less like themselves and more like “domesticated”, and our pets are further ahead on this transition.
You assume it’s a one-way street.
Humans having a proclivity towards “cute” animals is as much an evolved trait as animals becoming “cuter” to better adapt to presence.
Hell, for that matter, it isn’t just us that have a proclivity towards “cuteness”. It exists in plenty of species, we just tend to be the ones most prone to it outside of very similar species.
It is absolutely evolution because it isn’t selective.
I don’t understand your last sentence. Selection a main mechanism of evolution.
I think the hangup is thinking evolution can’t proceed quickly. We were taught in school that evolution take millions of years and we resist the idea that it can move quickly.
We’ve been figuring out over the last two decades that evolution can move fast, given enough selective pressure.
Arguing with a reasonalbe Christian on reddit 10-years back; Said African elephants were growing smaller, or no tusks, in response to poaching. He called it “breeding”. I call it hella selective pressure. Same difference?
The example of elephants producing less ivory for us to poach is unintentional selective breeding, yeah. Evolution works way faster when directed by an intelligence than when it’s left up to a relatively stable environment, simply because we exert more pressure for change.
i think also the concept of “survival of the fittest” was like an alpha thing; who fought nature and won. versus fittest being more about fitting into the environment better. the best fit for the specific environment.