AzurePhoenix

No, the eye-flap thingy diverging would be genetic drift (and maybe divergence). A bottleneck occurs when a population is reduced to a tiny number of it's original number. An example would be when cheetahs were nearly wiped out in some unknown disaster, leaving only a handful of surviving animals (some have theorized even a single female and several males), from which all modern cheetahs are descended I think the eye-flap thing evolved as a sort of natural goggle against wind-blown sand. I'd say keeping your eyesight would be a major survival benefit.

Interesting thought. Maybe rapists should use such an argument in court. "Your Honor' date=' I'd just like to know why you're attempting to prosecute me for attacking and violating just one woman when I've been perfectly nice to at least one other!![/i']"

I'm already on it. I've picked out a particularly vicious, dominant-male Mandrill, and don't worry, I have a rusty old whisk heating up in the fireplace as we type.

Then I think that I'd just to point out that a hostile and uncalled-for attitude directed towards a, innocent victim of a brutal crime (a victim, who I might add, seems to have coped remarkably well with her experience) is simply as petty and malicious as someone can get without actually crossing over into violence. I'd also like to point out that most of us as of yet have said what I know we're all really thinking. (well, me at least)

How 'bout you try a little sensitivity

Excuse me, Chicken-boy, but would you verify if that was a freindly quip, or a hostile remark? Answer wisely.... Everything J'Dona said was very insightful, I'm shuddering with the possibilities. My question is, in such a society, would we have the proper incentive to advance quite as well as we might have in a war torn state (war always leads to scientific breakthroughs and advancements)

Well, I suppose there's an exception to any rule, but you need to state your case, otherwise, why would we make you that exception, rather than say, a drunken monkey, or a potato?

Only the greatest minds should be given the chance. Imagine if Einstein were still around to keep learning, theorizing, and helping out with every new step forward in physics.

Where did the pressures that drove our evolution come from? The evolution of dolphins? Parrots? They weren't always there, but face it, circumstances change, and that is what causes rapid adaptation in a species. Nothing stays the same. Sure, at the time octopus are relatively predator-free, and aren't social, but anything could occur to change those facts. Part of their success is due to their brains. If some deadly new octopus-eating predator evolved, they'd have to adapt to survive the threat. They could either re-evolve shells or evolve some new defense, or they could do what primate's did, and come up with defenses based on sheer intellectual power. Suppose that by huddling in groups and mobbing potential predators together was a good defense mechanism? Or they learn to attack predators with lumps of sharp coral or shells?

Who says that as time goes on gastropods won't eventually become endothermic? It's already happened twice, why not again? They're certainly more derived than other invertebrates. Given a few hundred million years, or a couple billion, I don't it'd be too far a leap. Not even much of a skip. A parrot's ability isn't necessarily why they are intelligent, it just allows us to recognize and gauge their smarts through full blown verbal communication. Their ability to mimic is a result of a very versatile syrinx. Ravens are remarkably intelligent too, but their ability to mimc is limited, whereas a lyrebird's mimicry-skills are fantastic, but they themselves aren't real brainy.I don't think being able to mimic people will lead to the higher cognitive ability. I consider that trait to be secondary to their natural communicative skills. If anything, evolving more complex "societies" among wild flocks is what will allow them to develop higher brain functions, and thereby use their ability to vocalize as a means to communicate with us.

Or save some cash and secretly slip them some sort of long-term ovulatation inhibititor at their next medical check-up or dentist's appointment.

I agree with every word. Same with the thief who loses his loses hand thing. Both should be imposed (as long as proof is available)

I think it's likely that life even evolved in this solar system (besides Earth). I have a vague feeling it's easier for life to evolve than most people are ready to admit. Consider that life evolved very early in Earth's history, and that's just the stuff we've found fossils of. I don't have any problem with the idea that primitive life evolved on mars, and now exists underground (but I think it probably died out), or that life absolutely thrives under the icy crust of europa. What is it estimated, that 20% of stars have planetary systems? That's many more than Erich Von Daniken's supposed 1 in a 1000 stars (one tenth of a percent), and he guestimated that 180,000,000 stars with planets capable of supporting life as we know it exist in the Milky Way alone. And that's assuming that it's difficult for life to evolve, which we can't know at all until we actually encounter and study life on other worlds.

I imagine that octopus would be good candidates for creatures capable of evolving into the "next sapient race." Good eyesight, strong communicative and problem-solving skills, and good dexterity. I think given time wild parrot species might, might naturally develop the higher cognitive abilties necessary for true communication, being highly social creatures. My vote goes out for Keas.

I could imagine us creating human-like organisms in labs to serve some slaving role (i have no doubts we will go through such a period again on this rollercoaster of civilization) which might then survive and replace us in the event we leave or die out, assuming of course, they don't. I'm not saying it's even close to likely, I'm just throwing out some imaginative speculation.

I don't think I'd like one of those dismembered inside me

Well, brown eyes would benefit in the sense that blue are more sensitive to light-induced damage. And its arguable that pretty eyes lead to the advantage of being able to woo potential mates, giving them an edge in the genetic world.

Layoffs are Tough -------------------- Mr. Smith owned a small business. He had two employees, Sarah and Jack. They were both extremely good employees - always willing to work overtime and chip in where needed. Mr. Smith was looking over his books one day and decided that he wasn't making enough money to warrant two employees and he would have to lay one off. But both Sarah and Jack were such good workers he was having trouble finding a fair way to do it. He decided that he would watch them work and the first one to take a break would be the one he would lay off. So, he sits in his office and watches them work. Suddenly, Sarah gets a terrible headache and needs to take an aspirin. She gets the aspirin out of her purse and goes to the water cooler to get something to wash it down with. Mr. Smith follows her to the water cooler, taps her on the shoulder and says, "Sarah, I'm going to have to lay you or Jack off." Sarah says, "Can you jack off? I have a headache." Damnit, how likely is it that someone posted the same joke only two pages before?!!! Whoever else used it, I'd like to apologize, and will be detracting this joke as soon as I can, I'll try to replace it with something else(or it'd be helpful if a mod erased it entirely)

Icthyosaurs (extinct) and dolphins and sharks all resemble eachother, but are unrelated. The Juaguarundi, a cat, is often regarded as weasel or otter-like. Andrewsarchus was a giant predator that resembled a wolf or hyena, but was technically an ungulate, related to hoofed animals. Ostriches closely resemble gallimimus, the classic "ostriche-dinosaur." This concept is convergent evolution, acquiring similar traits on an idependentbasis, because that particular trait happens to be well suited for the task being adapted for.

If we were gone for some hypothetical reason, they could go on to convergently evolve into human-like creatures, or they could take a completely different route.

It's more trouble than its worth. I'd prefer a Tazer and an envenomed switch-blade any day. As for guns, the types available should be limited, as well as who gets um (license system?). Break a law? No more gun privelages. People are just too stupid to be trusted without mandatory annual training and re-training.

We used them in the past, why not now? (As long as we remember to remove them prior to concentual escapades)

What are you asking or proposing? *EDIT* Oops, didn't spot your edit. Well in that case, all I have to say is whatever they think they can do, go for it.