60
Why aren't we evolved to eat grass? (literature.cafe)
submitted 6 months ago* by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
61 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It's everywhere. Why not just eat it instead of searching for veggies and meat which are more difficult to have?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

That random mutation didn't happen, basically.

Evolution is a purely subtractive process. It doesn't design things in, it just removes poorly-designed creatures (and all hypothetical offspring) until only things equipped to survive are left. And obviously, there are things to eat that aren't grass.

Edit: Herbivores can be smart, even the grazers. Look at elephants.

I can't believe how many other replies heap that fallacy on top of teleological evolution. Apes are mostly herbivorous anyway, WTF.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Evolution is not subtractive. Bacteria didn't evolve from humans

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [โ€“] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    In the sense humans are "better" or "greater" or something? Well, consider the global biomass of bacteria compared to humans - they seem to be doing okay. Or that there's more bacterial cells in you than human cells. Single-celled yeast evolved from mushrooms, barnacles evolved from something like shrimp or crabs, and there are eukaryotes that lost eukaryotic features like mitochondria because they didn't need them to survive.

    Buuut that's besides the point. I'm not sure how to make it more clear, but I meant subtractive as in selection is just about who dies. Random mutation is what adds features and new species.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent