00:01
So which species is better? which characteristic would make that species survive more? is it being strong, intelligent, or adaptable? for darwin, it wasn't strength or intelligence, but was adaptability or responding to change in the environment.
00:24
But why did darwin bet on that phenomenon and not the other two? so let's do a case study.
00:31
A strong species that i could think of are the dinosaurs that were very mainstream in the jurassic era.
00:45
They were lush green forests and they were very happy dominating until an asteroid hit and completely changed the environment.
00:57
A drastic change and a lot of species didn't make it, including the dinosaurs.
01:02
So would strongest meet the survival? survivality? it doesn't give the guarantee, so we don't want strongest.
01:15
When it comes to intelligence, let's say humans.
01:20
Can humans survive another asteroid hit? they could hit the asteroid, destroyed into pieces.
01:28
They could survive in a heat environment with air conditioning, and they have proper housing so they could survive in cold, they could survive anywhere, and they're one of the largest endowment species on the planet.
01:44
But can intelligence, why didn't darwin bet on intelligence rather than adaptability? what about coming up with weapons, nuclear weapons, guns, biological weapons? can humanity survive those or will it die? even before being as dominant as dinosaurs.
02:08
We're roughly not even 1 % old than the dinosaurs were in their era.
02:15
So nah, intelligence is not as good as adaptability.
02:22
By adaptable, one example i could think of are birds.
02:33
Technically, they're dinosaurs too, but they were the adaptable dinosaurs...