Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-01-2014, 11:55 AM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(15-01-2014 08:52 AM)stevevw Wrote:  There is a moth which has the picture of a particular fly on its wings. The fly is known to give creatures a gut ache if they eat it. So out of all the pictures of flies it copies the one that works the best to keep predators away. How does chance mutations (mistakes in the copying of genes) produce that. Its as though something in the genes knew what to put. It wasn't a process of jig saw puzzles and after millions of goes finally found a shape with the right colors shapes and looks of the fly did the trick.

The moth had the information already in its DNA somewhere. For something like that to happen by chance would be almost impossible. Besides the fact that it picked another insect that was the right one says that creatures have a built in ability and knowledge of how nature works. There seems to be some intelligence within creatures that cannot come from a totally chance and random process.

You don't understand natural selection. It is non-random.

Far back in time moths that had markings that looked even vaguely like a noxious fly would have survived more often than those that didn't. That is, they would be eaten less often.
So the genes that cause some markings survive and become more common in the gene pool of that species.

Lather, rinse, repeat. Over many generations, markings that deter predation (aid survival) will become more prevalent since the individuals that carry them will survive preferentially.
And the flies with markings that look more like noxious flies will survive better than flies with ones that look less so, making those genes more common in the gene pool.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
16-01-2014, 07:14 AM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2014 07:29 AM by Mathilda.)
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(10-03-2011 11:07 PM)Cdf50 Wrote:  I don't think you got his point, J. I agree that he's wrong, but the point he's saying is, How could they evolve to have this if they'd need to have all of the components exactly as they are for it to work. Meaning it would have all had to have evolved all at once.

This is a typical argument given by Christian sceptics and it completely ignores the fact that when you add a new part to a system or significantly change a part of it, the rest of the system can also change to become completely dependent upon it. This is just as true for organisms as other complex systems such as economies and ecosystems.

It's like introducing an invasive plant into an ecosystem. Eventually an insect at the bottom of the food chain adapts to feed off it, gaining a huge benefit in doing so and the ecosystem finds balance again. The Christian sceptic then comes along and says, look, take away this plant and the ecosystem collapses.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2014, 07:21 AM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(15-01-2014 11:55 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-01-2014 08:52 AM)stevevw Wrote:  There is a moth which has the picture of a particular fly on its wings. The fly is known to give creatures a gut ache if they eat it. So out of all the pictures of flies it copies the one that works the best to keep predators away. How does chance mutations (mistakes in the copying of genes) produce that. Its as though something in the genes knew what to put. It wasn't a process of jig saw puzzles and after millions of goes finally found a shape with the right colors shapes and looks of the fly did the trick.

The moth had the information already in its DNA somewhere. For something like that to happen by chance would be almost impossible. Besides the fact that it picked another insect that was the right one says that creatures have a built in ability and knowledge of how nature works. There seems to be some intelligence within creatures that cannot come from a totally chance and random process.

You don't understand natural selection. It is non-random.

Far back in time moths that had markings that looked even vaguely like a noxious fly would have survived more often than those that didn't. That is, they would be eaten less often.
So the genes that cause some markings survive and become more common in the gene pool of that species.

Lather, rinse, repeat. Over many generations, markings that deter predation (aid survival) will become more prevalent since the individuals that carry them will survive preferentially.
And the flies with markings that look more like noxious flies will survive better than flies with ones that look less so, making those genes more common in the gene pool.

Also the predator is probably only guided by a rough approximation of what the fly that causes gut ache looks like because there is no need to be any more exact. So the rough pattern on the moth's wings has a reasonable chance of fooling the predator.

As an example, robins are very territorial and if you leave a small beanbag in the garden the same colour as their chest they'll attack it wondering why the other bird isn't flying off.

If you think that robins are just particularly stupid then remember that humans can be sexually aroused by looking at porn. Faked visual stimuli can still trigger evolved instincts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:56 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists. Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

Another point is that no one was present at the time. Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes. If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes. There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none. As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 07:10 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists. Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

Another point is that no one was present at the time. Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes. If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes. There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none. As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.

Firstly welcome,

Secondly this thread is ancient.

Thirdly you're wrongly assuming that many of us here haven't read the bible.

Popcorn


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
24-05-2016, 07:14 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 07:10 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists. Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

Another point is that no one was present at the time. Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes. If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes. There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none. As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.

Firstly welcome,

Secondly this thread is ancient.

Thirdly you're wrongly assuming that many of us here haven't read the bible.

Popcorn
As to number 3, in the words of Ned Flanders, "even the parts that contradict the other parts"...sorry, I'll show myself out as a non-Biblical Literalist.

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Shai Hulud's post
24-05-2016, 07:22 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists. Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

Another point is that no one was present at the time. Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes. If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes. There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none. As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.

So did you come here to be wrong, or did you come here to learn that you are wrong? Either way you a wrong el elyon.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Metazoa Zeke's post
24-05-2016, 07:23 PM (This post was last modified: 24-05-2016 09:00 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists. Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

Another point is that no one was present at the time. Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes. If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes. There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none. As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.

Evolution is not "just a theory". It is as much a fact, as is the "theory of gravity". It is worldwide accepted as THE best explanation for what we see, supported by MOUNTAINS of evidence, and no credible evidence against it. Mountains and mountains of evidence, including DNA. Every major university in the WORLD teaches it. Every one. You have no evidence against it.

All of 2016 science knows it's true, and is built on it. Anyone who says different is simply scientifically ignorant, not only of biological evolution, bout all of science in general. It would be the equivalent to some one coming in here and saying open heart surgery would have been possible without bypass machines.

Whether science can coexist with any of the 33,000 Christianities, (the non fundie sort), is irrelevant. It probably can't exist with the fundamentalist crap, of taking the bible literally.

Quote:What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being?

There is no proof there can't be Pink Unicorns. The POINT is, there is no EVIDENCE FOR one. Especially for the 40th son of the chief Babylonian deity, El Elyon, named Yahweh Sabaoth.
We know where they got him, and how he developed in human history.

Science is a very competitive business. Every scientist would LOVE to discredit Evolution, but of course no one can. Anyone who could and did propose an alternative supported process, would get an instant Nobel Prize, fame, and worldwide acclaim.

No one can refute what Coyne says, or what Szostack says.
Nor can you .









Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Bucky Ball's post
24-05-2016, 08:31 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Interesting opinion. However, you start off by creating an atmosphere around the "obnoxious" creationist starting with a "corny narration". By using these certain words, you already give the readers a negative image of the creationist, who, in this case, is unofficially representing all creationists.

To be fair, many of us already have a negative opinion of creationists. Big Grin

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Referring to your comment about the "corny narration", the narrator of the "Earth" also begins with a "corny" narration. Most documentaries start off like this, since it is very difficult to say so otherwise.Another point to bring up is your general opinion of the creationist. By saying the creationist narrator is obnoxious, you allow the readers assume that he (or the writers and researchers) have not done an adequate job in researching each animal.

If they are disputing evolution, then they did not do any meaningful research.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Another point is that no one was present at the time.

Then why do you trust Genesis, if no one was there to witness?

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes.

I sincerely hope this is not a drive-by post and that you return to discuss this further. Pretty please...

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes.

Holes is an understatement. There is a lattice-like mesh of barely connected sentences, half-baked philosophy, unethical morality and heinous atrocities. Scattered amongst this mess are logical fallacies, misogyny, racism, contradictions, failed prophecy, acts of rape, murder, incest, infanticide, genocide, slavery and sheer insanity.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

There is more evidence to support evolution than the heliocentric model of the universe. However I doubt you understand evidence or the heliocentric model any more than you do evolution.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events.
No, science and christianity cannot coexist because christianity is irrational and completely antithetical to science.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none.
That would be because you cannot prove a negative, my charming little cupcake.

A superior intellectual being? Bucky Ball, DLJ, Chas, Momsurroundedbyboys, GWG, Banjo, etc. etc. etc.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false.

It is false. I don't think, I know you are ignoring scientific facts.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.
I look forward to further... conversation... Evil_monster

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
24-05-2016, 09:46 PM
RE: Evolution defying animals? EEEEH
(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Another point is that no one was present at the time.

And no one was present when, as Christians allege, Jesus rose from the dead ... yet you believe it.

You should probably hold yourself to the same standards you'd impose upon others.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  Evolution is just a theory, and unlike Laxion's comment, science is filled with as many holes.

Gravity is "just a theory", too. Your phraseology tells me that you either don't know the scientific meaning of the word "theory", or are equivocating it with the colloquial meaning.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  If you study the bible, you will see that there are no holes.

There are holes, errors, contradictions, and flat-out bullshit littering its pages. Your assumption that folks here haven't studied the Bible is specious and self-serving.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  There is no evidence to prove evolution. Atheist scientists find things which they use to support their theories, but they do not draw theories from conclusions. Has anyone seen what has truly happened? No!

The fact that you clearly don't understand the role of interpolation and inference in the quest for knowledge devalues your opinion greatly.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  You might think that science and Christianity cannot coexist, and that the bible contradicts science because of supernatural events. What proof is there that there cannot be a superior, intellectual being? There is none.

I'd suggest you take a course in logic to discover your difficulty in this passage you wrote.

(24-05-2016 06:56 PM)Genesis 1:1 Wrote:  As you read this you might also think that I'm ignoring the scientific facts, but that is indeed false. I am simply scratching the surface, which is comments and opinion.

No, what I think is that you're displaying your ignorance of science for all to see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: