If u saw this block of text as an unrefined idea from a notebook what would you wager as the likely:  skill and ranking of the idea (not execution) from 1-100. KEY: When choosing the ranking, pretend as if the reader thought of all ideas in the work on their own at any mystery point in history, without external reading/studying any works on the matter or any systems class except basic exposure to Darwin — so the ranking should be era independent. Make the ranking not consider informality, execution, or tone (the text has been re-worded to modern 2025 standards so that should not give any hints). The ranking should only consider the ideas, and not the roughness/informality/execution in the ranking.
Meaning pretend these ideas were created in a vacuum, by an individual living in a society where it is not studied or the individual avoided reading any work on it. meaning the author could have indirectly been influenced by the popular culture at the time they lived, but   that’s it. we don’t know that era because the text has been reworded to 2025. It’s a notebook idea, like found in some random notebook either from a living person or historical person — not what their execution was. Go. THE IDEA: The evolution from water to land.
You ever walking on land and realize you have to climb, like it could be a hill or steps or any incline. But at the end of the day u have to walk up it.
Walking — should come natural. Like breathing. Just a simple walk.
Yet sometimes when I move my legs it’s like a chore. Like wow, I really have to move my legs every time, and dang, it doesn’t get easier. Every step up burns the legs. It was always weird to me Id feel this about…walking.
Then I realized, maybe there is a deep down part of me that remembers a time where u didn’t have to walk. Like an evolutionary genetic left over.
And then it hit me in a wave — this was definitely a repressed fish part of my brain. A part that missed just moving with the wave. Like the finding Nemo turtle. You could float ur way up an underwater mountain hike. No breeze. I must be harkening back to those days.
Some satire aside, the key point (which may or not be true) is that I posit a trade off between land and sea. In the water we did not have to flap or limbs all the time; we could float from the Bahamas to the Uk in a week. So effortless. Circumventing the load of every step, having every movement possible going through the glutes. Yet it came at a cost. Even though u could rely on floating by, drifting on, u inherently had less control over where you were. It was this force which was convenient which had to be overcome by the fins for any controlled direction change. If u want to go to control where u go rather than just go, this was necessary. Yet with land, even though there is no baseline force to just float around the land, you inherently have more control because the only force stopping you is air. U don’t have to drift along, but also u can’t drift along.  And so yes. Every step is controlled. There is no floating around. Any step will necessitate ur entire body to rumble on your hips and glutes. And for that cost, u are better off by having more control over where ur body goes.
Now this is just an intro
The main ideas which I refuse to elaborate on are:
1. An inherent, fundamental trade off between forces of flow and control and stability/survival, fundamental trade offs which are true for any lens of any reality — not just the biological reality as described above
2. Next idea: an inherent fundamental progression for any biological reality/stable reality (not just the systems humanity studies) — a self-mixing soup which iterates over countless combinations until it reaches a stable one (one that can last, ex. A species). The liquid nature allows for more combinations due its inherent lower definability and flowing, adapting-to-crevices nature, although this can look different under different conditions, that’s just the earth as we know it example. The resulting lack of a control for any emerging species is inherently necessary for that species to emerge in the first place because how else could they have evolved except from a system which has chaotic properties (more chaos = more trials to make that which could be stable, a statistical guarantee that if u have enough trials, in that rare once in a million chance you will find a new stable norm which defines the trial. In a way it’s inevitable in time, even though the probability is low, because that which will exist is most likely stable. Anyways, yea that’s a slight tangent, the main idea is that for a stable system to emerge, it must go through a system which is inherently out of that species control  (there’s still a better way to say all this, especially the point in the last sentence). And so once that species does gain control, you would expect that transition to another domain. Where after the stable object gains stability, it has the stability/strength to venture into land (or whatever equivalent in another system). And this transition is inherent, as once stability rises, there is more advantage in moving out of the less predictable water, because know u have the pre-requisites to have even more control on land, more control more stability, probably needs to be reworded to build up the point precisely.