[saywatnow]

> This makes sense, as humans have co-evolved along venomous snakes for presumably a very long time.

I always find appeals to evolution for phenomena like this a bit weak. In the Darwinian sense, this response would have to be a random mutation that is environmentally selected for. Not a biologist, but that seems a very high-order function to be subject to random mutations.

[RandomInteger4]

I don't think you understand evolution. Evolution is not just random mutations.

[saywatnow]

I take it you do. Thanks for enlightening me!

[abecedarius]

That's a general argument against any complex adaptation. Here's some experimental evidence I found on a quick search: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... (I only skimmed this paper.)

[saywatnow]

Thanks! That's excellent. Different measurements from populations with varying exposure to snakes certainly seems to weigh in favour of an evolutionary explanation.

> That's a general argument against any complex adaptation.

I know my comment looks remarkably close to typical poorly-informed arguments for ID (eyeballs, even bananas lol), which probably explains the poor reaction to it. There's a lot of fuzzy thinking about evolution all round, and I'm just as guilty of it as the next person.

Thanks for taking the time to give me a good read :).

[abecedarius]

You're welcome! I actually agree that it feels weird that selection can work effectively on such a long chain of causes between genes and behaviors. It'll be exciting to learn more.

[GuiA]

The "co-evolved" was a mistake on my part, thanks for pointing it out. Removed for clarity.