Sure, but we could arbitrarily redefine or tweak ‘rule’ to include so many different things that it would become meaningless; for example, it can be argued that cereal crops dominate humans, because with a bribe of simple carbohydrates, they have persuaded us to expend a great deal of our time, effort and resources to promote their reproduction and widespread distribution.
Is there any argument that could be made against the prokaryotes (or I suppose Monera) being the dominant “master-race” form on the planet? The most widespread, longest established, most diverse, most highly adapted to whatever niche you care to think of, and the just plain hardiest beasties on the planet. Fundamental to the working of the entire eco-system, everything else is just froth, a passing fad, subject to catastrophic change and sudden extinction (although yer insects and beetles are making a pretty good go at permanence). The only thing that will end our tiny chum’s quiet domination is the eventual end of the planet.
I guess that human intelligence does offer at least some prospect of a new “master-race”, although it’ll be largely machine based.
As others have pointed out, the term “master race” is essentially meaningless. The definition has to be tweaked to allow any contenders at all, and we can fudge the definition to ensure that any contender we like is the winner.
No, evolution occurs continuously, all organisms have existed for the same period of time and all have been established for exactly tye same period.
It makes no sense to say that the bird descendants of the original life form have existed for less time than the bacterial descendants.
That quite simply isn’t true. There are numerous niches bacteria simply can not exploit at all, which is precisely why other organisms are able to exist.
For example you can not name a bacterium that is adapted to the niche of migratory browser of trees on the African savanna. Numerous mammals fill that niche, but no bacteria whatsoever. It is a niche they are simply incapable of exploiting.
Once again, this simply isn’t true. For example no bacteria can survive a 5 kilometre journey overland across the Sahara desert at noon carrying a 10pound load. Countless other species can, but not a single bacterium is hardy enough to accomplish that task.
This is meaningless. An ecosystem is the interaction of ALL organisms. The disappearance of any one means that it ceases to exist. All organisms are equally fundamental to the working of the entire eco-system, by definition.
Demonstrably false, with offhand ease.
Regard: Blake, aged 20
Blake, as of today.
Q.E.D.
Nah, I was thick as shit at 20 too.
An even too rare on this board. Bravo to you, sir!
With the caveat I menationed above about “master race” fallacy, I think you’re wrong. It’ll probably be genetically engineered.
Here’s an idea: Cockroaches will never evolve intelligence because it requires massive amounts of brain matter, and land-dwelling arthropods just can’t grow that big. There’s a reason you never see insects or spiders or scorpions above a certain size – exoskeletal anatomy can’t support any more mass. It’s the square-cube law – if you double an objects lineal dimensions, its surface area is squared but its volume (and mass) is cubed. That’s why an elephant is designed along very different lines than a gazelle, and a gazelle has different anatomy and proportions than a mouse.
Well, that’s a well known problem in biology, but let’s not forget the Permian insects like early dragonflies with wingspans up to 2 feet. The couldn’t support a human-sized brain, but we don’t know exactly how intelligence is linked to brain size. Most of what we know relates to mammals.
Weren’t atmospheric oxygen levels higher back then? That’s one explanation that I was given for the existence of huge insects.
Before or after the arrival of the Thetans?
Yes, and I’ve heard that hypothesis, too. I’m not sure how much weight that’s given in biology circles these days, though.
Anyway, nature has many ways of getting the job done. The main thing to remember is that we’re just one way of doing it, not the only way.
Oh, yeah? See any dolphins posting lately?
Last time this discussion came up, I was asking what species had the largest combined biomass. I think that would be an acceptable indicator for succes. However, noone had an answer.
Before you said that we need cockroaches more than we need them. Now somehow all other arthropods, and all bacteria, emerged in the equation too.
If you claim is “we need all other living things more than all other living things need us”, then I think we can agree on that.
Even if he didn’t mean his question to be strictly taxonomic, it still doesn’t make sense to call bacteria a “race” in the sense that cockroaches are, or humans are. then another competing race would be, for example, animals.
The OP said “human-like intelligence,” and I take “master race” in that context to mean that it can use its intelligence to spread over a sizeable portion of the world and significantly change its environment to its advantage. To address the question, I’m amazed we did it. IANA biologist, but my impression is that evolution is about as far from a straight-line March of Progress as you can get; it’s more like a drunkard’s walk. What makes us a master race is intelligence, so we can figure out what to do, grasping appendages, so we can do it, and language, so we can tell others about it and they can build on our ideas; i.e., create culture. That’s one heck of an evolutionary trifecta. I don’t think there’s any reason that, in 165,000,000 flippin’ years, some species of dinosaur couldn’t have gotten a few mutations together and done it; they just didn’t. Not lucky enough, I guess.
What partially sparked my interest was this BBC article Evolution reversed in mice:
So I’m wondering about further splits and mutations that could turn mice (or cockroaches or jellyfish) into human-level intelligence lifeforms.
Though I wonder how much the species would have to grow in size to have sufficient brain matter? Are there any species whose brains are growing larger?
Again, we can’t know this. You cannot extrapolate from the past into the future. Evolution does not happen along a trajectory.
I am having a hard time understanding this, perhaps because I am unclear on your use on the word “organisms.” If cockroaches have existed for millions of years, while other species have come and gone, have they not existed longer?
I am sure the answer is simple, yet still it eludes me.
You’re forgetting the earth’s current master race, nut humans, someone who evolved from humans, Nietszche’s übermensch, Keith Richards! Nothing wipes him out! Ever!
He doesn’t mean organism = species. He’s using it to mean the current species + every species in its line of descent since the begining of life on earth. And since we think life started only once, then every organism is “as evolved” as every other organism.