Evolution is missing more than one link

[Garry Routh]

The secular scientific community expounds evolution as the explaination of how mankind got here. They go into great detail as to how natural selection gradually formed the more perfect being. Searching down to the genetics to try and support the argument.

In all the talk of this process, I have never heard it addressed as how love came to be. If love is the a by-product of the process, it should be visited upon the wide range of species, at least down to the rodent level. When did love become part of the process and if it had a meager beginning, how did it get passed from one species to another (providing one argues that it might appear in other mammals). If it did get passed from one species to another... why doesn't it get retained if it is an advantage?

Elephants and dolphins display what could be interpreted as love. Elephants guard their young and apparently morn their dead. Dolphins to a lesser extent. The apes appear to have an emotional link till the young grow to adult and then the affectionate behavior turns into competition. In human love the elderly are still loved and they love the young adult even more.

Love's nature is one of expansion. If it shows up in a species it should behave like the constant it is.

Garry Routh

[Islanders_for_the_cup_04]

In all the talk of this process, I have never heard it addressed as how love came to be. If love is the a by-product of the process, it should be visited upon the wide range of species, at least down to the rodent level. When did love become part of the process and if it had a meager beginning, how did it get passed from one species to another (providing one argues that it might appear in other mammals). If it did get passed from one species to another... why doesn't it get retained if it is an advantage?



How about observing the Endocrine System?

Try Oxytocin other wise known as the "cuddle hormone".


<H3>Physiologic Effects of Oxytocin

In years past, oxytocin had the reputation of being an "uncomplicated" hormone, with only a few well-defined activities related to birth and lactation. As has been the case with so many hormones, further research has demonstrated many subtle but profound influences of this little peptide. Nevertheless, it has been best studied in females where it clearly mediates three major effects:</B>


Stimulation of milk ejection (milk letdown): Milk is initially secreted into small sacs within the mammary gland called alveoli, from which it must be ejected for consumption or harvesting. Mammary alveoli are surrounded by smooth muscle (myoepithelial) cells which are a prominant target cell for oxytocin. Oxytocin stimulates contraction of myoepithelial cells, causing milk to be ejected into the ducts and cisterns.
Stimulation of uterine smooth muscle contraction at birth: At the end of gestation, the uterus must contract vigorously and for a prolonged period of time in order to deliver the fetus. During the later stages of gestation, there is an increase in abundance of oxytocin receptors on uterine smooth muscle cells, which is associated with increased "irritability" of the uterus (and sometimes the mother as well). Oxytocin is released during labor when the fetus stimulates the cervix and vagina, and it enhances contraction of uterine smooth muscle to facilitate parturition or birth.

In cases where uterine contractions are not sufficient to complete delivery, physicians and veterinarians sometimes administer oxytocin ("pitocin") to further stimulate uterine contractions - great care must be exercised in such situations to assure that the fetus can indeed be delivered and to avoid rupture of the uterus.
Establishment of maternal behavior: Successful reproduction in mammals demands that mothers become attached to and nourish their offspring immediately after birth. It is also important that non-lactating females do not manifest such nurturing behavior. The same events that affect the uterus and mammary gland at the time of birth also affect the brain. During parturition, there is an increase in concentration of oxytocin in cerebrospinal fluid, and oxytocin acting within the brain plays a major role in establishing maternal behavior.

Evidence for this role of oxytocin come from two types of experiments. First, infusion of oxytocin into the ventricles of the brain of virgin rats or non-pregnant sheep rapidly induces maternal behavior. Second, administration into the brain of antibodies that neutralize oxytocin or of oxytocin antagonists will prevent mother rats from accepting their pups. Other studies support the contention that this behavioral effect of oxytocin is broadly applicable among mammals.
</H3>

[Garry Routh]

Islander... that is all chemical. Even insects have a controlling chemistry... especially ants. The experience of pleasure from something touched is not the same as love. If you are pointing to brain chemstry as the origin of love than all mammals love. The behavor of love is not observed in them.

GR

[gaiacomm]

Study the argentina ant for some answers!

[Islanders_for_the_cup_04]

Islander... that is all chemical. Even insects have a controlling chemistry... especially ants. The experience of pleasure from something touched is not the same as love. If you are pointing to brain chemstry as the origin of love than all mammals love. The behavor of love is not observed in them.

GRSo in another words you have no idea what your talking about.

[gaiacomm]

Maybe!

[dewey189]

<Searching down to the genetics to try and support the argument.>

That is patently untrue.

[moonieblue]

The more we learn about the human Body the more we learn that everything is a chemical interaction.

Love could have survived for the simple reason that it does benifit evolution. It is a benifit in mother child bonding has Islander stated , without it our helpless young would never survive. Same for many other animals. An elephant calf may not be has defensless, but when considering size is the main defense of this animal and how long it takes them to grow, without bonding in the herd they would not be likley to survive. Predetors in their region are specificly designed to kill young or sick animals. Has a defense, a bond(love?) is formed to protect the young.

Love between a man and a women is also necasary for the species to have developed this far. Love is what keeps us working together , raising children, and helping our communities. If we did not love one another and cooperate ( much the same has elephants) we wouldn't have flourished the way we have.

Group mantalities are a very important part of we have developed has a species. We are not strong enough to survive on our own , our evolutionary strength has a species comes from our abilities of innovation and cooperation(love). Without them we never would have survived.

The theory that love disproves evolution is patently wrong. Love is a benefit to evolution. Evolution uses anything that could be considered a benifit and moves it foreward. The emotions of man propel him in both postive and negative ways, but the positives far outweigh the negatives. Even hate can move us ahead, but love does seem to be the better choice.

And lastly Gary, I say all this believing in God and evolution at the same time. Evolution and the bodies chemical reactions are all part of the grand scheme to me. I find it amazing that out of all chemical reactions that take place in this universe that love could be one of them. When I think of the mechanics of how a star works and how we are made up almost the same basic materials has everything in else, love is a miracle. And I do thank God for that.

[moonieblue]

Garry said:

In all the talk of this process, I have never heard it addressed as how love came to be. If love is the a by-product of the process, it should be visited upon the wide range of species, at least down to the rodent level. When did love become part of the process and if it had a meager beginning, how did it get passed from one species to another (providing one argues that it might appear in other mammals). If it did get passed from one species to another... why doesn't it get retained if it is an advantage?

Love and bonding are present in some mammals , but not all. I think it comes down to how long the young mature and weather the animals are cabable of survival has lone animals. Rodents don't need lasting bonds to survive they are mature in a matter of weeks. But they are also very protective of thier young. I have worked in pet stores and most of the bites I recieved were from mother rodents. Would lasting bonds be necasarty to therir survival though ? No, they are scavengers, they don't need to hunt together. Not to mention they reproduce often and alot.

For how bonding can from in one subspecies and not another lets looks at big cats. Lions in Africa hunt and live in packs. Their prey is often to big to hunt alone and their young have natural predetors. It is an evelotionary benifit to them to live in a pride for these reasons.

Now lets take a look at Asian tigers. They are for the most part the top of the food chain. They hunt by themselves and live alone the only exception being when they mate. They have no need to form lasting relationships with one another becouse they can survive perfectly fine on their own. They don't have has much a threat to thier young has the lions do so they survive perfectly fine by themselves. With no(evolutionary) need for the bonds of a group they do fine alone.

Love and bonds in the entire animal kingdom are present where needed and absent when they might become a hazard to the animal.

[Sam Ayyam]

Another strange thread to have moved off topic. Are these being posted here ab initio?

[a-Citisen]

"Love", is it physical or mental? If its physical some of the foregoing messages must be correct as they concern ants, lions and whatever. But, if "love" is a mental matter which would take it well beyond the limitations of anything's physical being how would attributing such mentalism to animals occur? If "love" were only a physical matter how could a same-sex couple come to "love" a child which necessarily excludes ONE of them? The only way such "love" for a child in a same-sex relationship can be known is via some mental action, afterall same-sex relationships are not animal-like.