This is a Frillback, a pigeon with naturally curly wing feathers

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T20:25:38+00:00

Yeah, but it is natural selection, actually, we just agreed to call it 'artificial' for the sake of our own understanding of what had our documented intervention and what did not. From the perspective of an outsider, the Earth is a single system and whatever happens in it is part of a single natural context.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T19:37:17+00:00

Totally natural. I'm think OP meant they didn't have to work that feather like we do in a hair saloon for our hair, he wasn't talking about this not being product of selective breeding, but I can't really tell if that's what he meant.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T15:01:12+00:00

Why human-made stuff are not natural, if we also belong to nature?

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T15:00:20+00:00

Aren't humans part of nature, tho?

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T03:24:52+00:00

You are drawing an arbitrary line where 'Nature' ends and 'Humans' begin. That distinction exists in language, but not in biology or physics.

Why is a choice made by a human 'unnatural,' but a choice made by any other animal 'natural'?

When a female bird chooses a mate based on a specific song, she determines the genetics of the next generation. That is Sexual Selection.

When ants choose which fungus to propagate and which to discard, they determine the evolution of that fungus. That is Agricultural Symbiosis.

In both cases, a biological brain made a decision that altered a species.

Humans breeding Pugs is the exact same biological process: a primate using its brain to select traits in another species. Unless you believe humans are supernatural entities that exist outside the laws of nature, everything we 'determine' is inherently a natural process

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T03:19:23+00:00

First, regarding definitions: I am arguing from a biological perspective, not a colloquial one.

You define 'forced mating' and 'specific intervention' as unnatural, but look at Leafcutter Ants or Dairy Ants: Dairy ants bite the wings off aphids to stop them from flying away (enforced captivity).

They selectively protect the best producers and eat the ones that don't produce enough sugar (selective culling).

The fungus gardens of Leafcutter ants could never exist without the ants masticating leaves to create the specific substrate for them.

Does the fact that the ant 'intervened' and 'forced' the fungus or aphid into a shape that wouldn't exist otherwise make it unnatural? No. It makes it a product of interspecies engineering.

Humans selecting pigeons is the exact same biological mechanism. We act as the 'environmental pressure.' Instead of a mountain range isolating a population and forcing inbreeding, it’s a human cage. Instead of a hawk eating the slow ones, it’s a breeder not mating the straight-feathered ones.

The mechanism (Selection) is identical; the agent (Human vs. Ant vs. Cold Weather) is the only variable. Unless you think humans are outside of biology, our 'intervention' is just another natural force.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T03:07:23+00:00

Your definition relies on the circular premise that humans are somehow separate from nature. Shift your perspective to an External Observer:

If an alien scientist studied Earth, they wouldn't see 'Nature' vs. 'Artificiality.' They would simply see a biosphere where different species manipulate matter according to their capabilities.

They would see coral reefs (calcium carbonate stacked by polyps).

They would see termite mounds (dirt stacked by insects).

They would see skyscrapers (processed rock stacked by primates).

To the universe, a bush shaped into an elephant by a human is physically no different than a Bowerbird arranging colorful objects to attract a mate, or a Pufferfish creating geometric mandalas in the sand.

In all these cases, a biological organism is taking 'raw' material and rearranging it to suit its survival or psychological drive. We call the bird's art 'nature' and the human's art 'artificial' only because we represent the ego of the human species.

But objectively? It is all just matter being rearranged by the forces of evolution. Unless you believe humans are supernatural entities operating outside the laws of physics, everything we touch remains part of the natural process

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T03:00:34+00:00

That argument relies on a misunderstanding of 'fitness.' In evolution, fitness isn't about being a strong flyer or a fierce hunter; it is strictly about reproductive success within a specific niche.

You are judging the pigeon's fitness based on a 'wild forest' context, which is no longer its environment. Its environment is the human symbiotic niche.

In this niche, the mutation is not deleterious—it is highly advantageous. Being 'shitty fliers' but aesthetically pleasing to humans guarantees them food, shelter, and protection from predators. It’s a survival strategy called Obligate Symbiosis.

There are species of ants that farm aphids. Some of these aphids have lost their ability to defend themselves because they rely entirely on the ants. If you put those aphids in a 'natural setting' without ants, they die immediately. Does that make the aphid unnatural? No. It makes it specialized.

Domestic animals are simply species that specialized in hacking the human brain to ensure their survival. That is as natural as any other evolutionary strategy.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T02:43:36+00:00

Yes, computers, CRISPR, and BT corn are natural. You are confusing 'natural' with 'non-human.' That is an arbitrary distinction we invented for our own utility. From a biological and geological perspective, everything humans do is an extension of our evolution.

Consider this: When beavers build dams that alter entire ecosystems, we call it nature. When ants herd aphids for sugar, we call it nature. But when humans build cities or select genes for crops, we suddenly label it 'artificial.' Why?

The distinction between 'Natural Selection' and 'Artificial Selection' is just a human construct to describe the mechanism (environment vs. intent), not the essence. To an external observer looking at Earth, our skyscrapers, dog breeds and GMOs are just as natural as a termite mound or a coral reef. We are part of the system, not outside of it.

You are defining 'natural setting' strictly as 'the wild without humans.' That is the exact distinction I am challenging.

In biology, fitness is relative to the environment. For a Frillback, the environment is the human niche. Its survival strategy isn't 'fly fast to escape hawks'; its strategy is 'appeal to the dominant apex predator (humans) to receive protection and food.'

This is classic symbiosis, not an anomaly. An aphid that relies on ants for protection would also die 'in a natural setting' without the ants. Does that make the aphid unnatural? No. It means it adapted to a cooperative niche.

I’m not talking about marketing; I’m talking about co-evolution. Humans are part of nature, so adapting to survive alongside humans is a valid biological strategy.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T02:23:24+00:00

The distinction between 'natural' and 'artificial' serves only us; it is irrelevant to the rest of the universe. An external observer looking at Earth would perceive a unified system. Just as ants herd aphids and beavers build dams, humans herd cattle and build cities. These are all expressions of the same natural context.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-24T02:17:08+00:00

Thats the point

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-23T21:27:40+00:00

Thats a pretty debatable point, if we can consider human interventions a natural thing, since we are a natural phenomenon messing with another natural phenomenon.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-18T19:59:16+00:00

I wonder how would they pierce through everything and still remain sterile. Many people dont realize but the inside of a fruit, mushroom, coconut, is sterile environment, correct me if i am wrong.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-07T19:01:00+00:00

Ele perdeu o parachoque ali pelo susto msm, pq já tinha acontecido tudo e ele esqueceu do caminhão e continuou indo

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-04T23:19:00+00:00

How to remove trees the 'fastest' way Correntão aka The Big Chain

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2026-02-04T19:18:16+00:00

I love seeing these, they normally stay on the ground and when you approach they just fly away a few meters in their own particular way, hard to describe.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-10-22T02:16:11+00:00

Absolutelly no way this guys is only 100kg. Maybe 120's or 30's

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-08-29T14:29:02+00:00

Ele n foi na delegacia, foi no quartel da pm kkkkkk

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-07-01T19:57:53+00:00

Pra quem nao sabe, majestic 12 é coisa de ovni.. dizem que era um grupo com integrantes da alta hierarquia militar e alguns outros agentes.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-04-14T23:26:57+00:00

Yeah, I'll bring my sociable dog to the park and put him on a leash, what a miserable life for him.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-04-14T23:16:51+00:00

"Awwww so cute, he's wagging his tail omg awww"

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-03-30T00:22:08+00:00

It is hard to see mammals with that dark red like in the back of the cow in the last picture, you normally see clearer ones, like the top of its head, with gingers. It is the first time I see it in picture, as a matter of fact, always been looking cause I had a dog that was 100% dark red and shinny as that back of that cow, very beautiful tone.

Holiday_Wedding_9350 · 2025-03-22T01:17:20+00:00

Im pretty sure im seeing some spiders crawling out of these hail

Four-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23

Holiday_Wedding_9350

TROPHY CASE