Origin of civilisation - logical approach - part 2

Now that we know about the nature of change, that, it is gradual and is linked to time, applying this to the common ancestor of humans, can we really say that, only a few numbers in our ancestral group evolved or changed into humans? (For example: in a group of 100, say 10 evolved or changed. This is just to give urself an idea). Write down ur answer. (Hope ur tracking the Q’s and ur A’s). Instead of taking the whole world into consideration, let me just narrow down to one particular region where the population had had its first evolved or transformed group. As the evolution definition says, (Part 1), evolution involves two opposing forces, one that introduces variation in traits and the other which makes certain traits more common. Here I would like to introduce the second factor again attributed to change, “Difference of Opinion” or CHANGE in Opinion. Sounds rather easy to grasp, but the effects of this small phrase can even pierce the sky, (may be it really did!). I think it’s inappropriate here to narrate difference of opinion among humans, and would directly go to the animals and plants.

Animals and plants!!!!!!!!!! . Now, don’t pause, read on …

Ex 1: Difference of Opinion in animals: Simple stray dog fight in the streets – I guess we all have witnessed or at least heard of stray dogs barking at each other, in the absence of humans. How would you like to justify this?

Ex 2: Before increasing the time scale for this factor, please answer this question: Though everyone knows what smoking does to one’s health why is that some prefer to be smokers and the others not? Why some choose to be vegetarians and the others not? Going back in time, did really our forerunners chose what they wanted to be? In simple terms, can I say that amphibians came into being only because a certain number in their group had a different opinion that they really can go out of water and live, (of course they were assisted by physical changes) but did they really dare? That is the question.

Can we justify herbivores, carnivores and omnivores in a similar pattern? If we go back in time again, where the so called organisms haven’t evolved but the plants had, can we apply the same? Don’t forget Venus fly trap and other vicious plants that do exist in the world. Did u get the link between difference of opinion and animals and plants now?

Now going back to our antecedents who have just evolved, can we logically deduce that the difference of opinion in many areas (finding new prey, moving faster, walking on two limbs… etc) grew stronger and stronger with time, that eventually they separated from their ancestors and came into being as the top most predators, while the others in the group who hadn’t dared, continued to remain as chimpanzees or Gorillas and are walking the earth even today.

Before going deep into origin of civilizations I would like to synchronize the mythological ideas to the current status of evolution in this article and its gonna be my part3 contents