• BonerMan@ani.socialEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    I mean its working, every plant useful to humans is being given the right to stay with us.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      This is the correct answer.

      Life is programmed to make more of itself. Successful life means more successful reproduction and numbers.

      Just because we consume that life doesn’t mean that it failed in any way; quite the opposite, if we propagate that life because we find it desirable for some reason that life has become more successful than its competitors.

      Everything from apple trees to cattle have become incredibly successful thanks to humans’ desire for them and being the benefactors of their propagation. They are the winners in a backhanded sort of way.

      • loaExMachina@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        8 days ago

        Mint is a pretty sturdy plant, it can grow in a variety of climates and even get a bit invasive at times. Among the domesticated plants, it might be one of those with the best chance to still strive after humans disappear.

        • shneancy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          8 days ago

          many consider it a weed. always make sure to plant your mint in a pot (even if you want it in your garden just bury the pot with a little bit of the edge sticking out), do not plant it directly in dirt, though if you do, you’ll never again not have mint in your garden? and your neighbours’ gardens too! :D

    • frezik@midwest.socialEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      Had an armchair hypothesis last night. Yeast makes alcohol, and we basically domesticated it on accident. Beer/wine making goes back to the neolithic (at least), and we’re in a symbiotic relationship with it.

      That part is pretty well established science, but the the hypothesis goes that alcohol reduces human inhibitions, which makes us fuck more, which means more humans who want to continue making beer and wine with the secret helper, yeast.

      But maybe that’s not right and verging on evo psych territory of a hypothesis that has no strong evidence beyond fitting some known facts.

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    Fuck it.

    Send the mushrooms. Send the fugu. Send the rotting fruits and the poisonous leafs. Send it all.

    That’ll get ‘em.

  • iii@mander.xyzEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    Maybe make it neurotoxic, add some nicotine? Surely they won’t…

  • pinkystew@reddthat.comEnglish
    0·
    8 days ago

    It bothers me how many people think that evolutionary traits are in any way chosen or designed for a specific purpose.

    • scutiger@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      Same here. Evolution doesn’t work that way. It’s basically the opposite. Species don’t evolve to solve a problem, they evolve randomly and sometimes that solves a problem for them. Or sometimes, it pushes the species into a very narrow niche where its survival is ensured as long as the current extremely precarious situation they find themselves in doesn’t change.

      • kevin@mander.xyzEnglish
        0·
        8 days ago

        Species don’t evolve to solve a problem, they evolve randomly and sometimes that solves a problem for them.

        Eh… they mutate randomly, and then selection acts. If there is variation that solves a problem, selection will promote that variation.

        Evolution is very much not random, it is a direct consequence of variation and selection. This does not mean that they evolve to solve problems, but problems often drive evolution.

    • samus12345@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      8 days ago

      Selected through continued survival and reproduction. Maybe a more accurate template would be something like, “Awesome, I’ve evolved with [trait] which deters predators!”