Intellegent design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-01-2017, 10:03 PM
Intellegent design
It is said that the things of GOD are subtle yet profound. Something that may seem to be neither, that relates to intellegent design and sustenance for continued existence is fat...as in fat content in meat.

I'll explain;

-Is it true that fattier tissues hold more caloric value....energy?

-Is it true that fattier tissues have more flavor or taste?
It's also easier to eat more quickly than lean muscle.

So we as meat eaters are naturally drawn to the most beneficial sustenance. And in a more primitive hunting/gathering scheme, the most nutritious prey would actually be easier to spot and catch due to proportions.


I'll leave it alone... not a coincidence and evolution doesn't care remember?

Sorry, I'm done.

peace
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2017, 10:11 PM
RE: Intellegent design
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Sorry, I'm done.

If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-01-2017, 10:34 PM
RE: Intellegent design
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  It is said that the things of GOD are subtle yet profound.

No. Just fake.

Quote: Something that may seem to be neither, that relates to intellegent design and sustenance for continued existence is fat...as in fat content in meat.

Meat is not the only source of fat. Too bad. You're premise is shot to hell.
http://nutritiondata.self.com/foods-0090...000-1.html

Quote:I'll explain;

Do you have to ?

Quote:So we as meat eaters are naturally drawn to the most beneficial sustenance. And in a more primitive hunting/gathering scheme, the most nutritious prey would actually be easier to spot and catch due to proportions.

We eat all sorts of things. We are omnivores. The bigger the animal, the more dangerous it is to hunt. There goes that theory.

Quote:I'll leave it alone... not a coincidence and evolution doesn't care remember?

We can only hope.
You're sounding quite desperate.

Quote:Sorry, I'm done.

We're not.

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
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
05-01-2017, 12:06 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  It is said that the things of GOD are subtle yet profound.

Only by Deepak Chopra.

Quote:So we as meat eaters...

Biology Fail. Check your dentition. Those molars aren't for chewing the fat.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Paleophyte's post
05-01-2017, 01:16 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  So we as meat eaters are naturally drawn to the most beneficial sustenance. And in a more primitive hunting/gathering scheme, the most nutritious prey would actually be easier to spot and catch due to proportions.

You could try reading what actual biologists have to say about it. Just a suggestion.

The short version is this: our ability to develop large brains was based in part on our increasing intelligence and coordination (chimps also show this type of coordination, in their meat-hunts), allowing us to catch more high-calorie meat animals, leading to an increase-in-brain-size cycle. However, as you can see in the article, they think the earliest meat-eating hominids (a bit under 2 million years ago) were primarily scavengers, not hunters, who ate antelope remains killed by other predators. The highly-successful hunting would come later.

As far as "easiest to catch" goes, I'm not sure what fatty animal you're talking about.

Wild boars? Good luck surviving THAT hunt with wood and flint, buddy!
[Image: wild_boar_1.jpg]

Antelopes? Maybe, if you set a trap and drove them into it... but they're certainly not fatty or easy to catch.

[Image: impalamale.jpg]

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
05-01-2017, 01:24 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 01:16 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  However, as you can see in the article, they think the earliest meat-eating hominids (a bit under 2 million years ago) were primarily scavengers, not hunters, who ate antelope remains killed by other predators. The highly-successful hunting would come later.

Because our ancestors were just smart enough to take up rocks and smash open the bones, getting to the bone marrow itself; a source of fat (and thus calories) effectively left on the table by all other predators. This meant that even a mostly stripped bare carcass could still be a valuable source of sustenance.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
05-01-2017, 01:26 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 01:24 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(05-01-2017 01:16 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  However, as you can see in the article, they think the earliest meat-eating hominids (a bit under 2 million years ago) were primarily scavengers, not hunters, who ate antelope remains killed by other predators. The highly-successful hunting would come later.

Because our ancestors were just smart enough to take up rocks and smash open the bones, getting to the bone marrow itself; a source of fat (and thus calories) effectively left on the table by all other predators.

And brains. We're smart because our ancestors were zombies.

Well, they figured out how to crack the skulls, which the predators couldn't... so we ate a lot of (high-fat, high-calorie) brains, apparently. Big Grin

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
05-01-2017, 01:33 AM (This post was last modified: 05-01-2017 01:49 AM by Reltzik.)
RE: Intellegent design
(04-01-2017 10:03 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  It is said that the things of GOD are subtle yet profound. Something that may seem to be neither, that relates to intellegent design and sustenance for continued existence is fat...as in fat content in meat.

I'll explain;

-Is it true that fattier tissues hold more caloric value....energy?

-Is it true that fattier tissues have more flavor or taste?
It's also easier to eat more quickly than lean muscle.

So we as meat eaters are naturally drawn to the most beneficial sustenance. And in a more primitive hunting/gathering scheme, the most nutritious prey would actually be easier to spot and catch due to proportions.


I'll leave it alone... not a coincidence and evolution doesn't care remember?

Sorry, I'm done.

peace

Of course, we don't actually get to taste them until we spot them and catch them, so how does the sense of taste let us know which ones to hunt?

More seriously, there's nothing here that uniquely or even strongly indicates "a god did it" over other possible explanations. This is exactly the sort of optimization process that evolution excels at.

Do your taste buds do a moderately good job of telling you which foods are kinda okay, which ones are great, and which ones to spit out? Great, you've got a decent chance of survival in the genetic sense -- that is, living long enough to reproduce and passing those family taste buds down to your progeny, with some variation.

Does one of your children, due to variation, have a worse sense of taste, so they can barely tell the difference? Too bad, they've got a poor chance of survival. They're more likely to die of food poisoning or malnutrition before they reproduce, and even if they do have children, those children are likely to suffer the same setbacks.

Does another one of your children, again due to variation, have an excellent sense of taste, so they can identify even the smallest amount of cyanide in the wild almonds they're sampling, or quickly tell whether the meat they're eating has gone rancid? Great! They're far more likely to live and pass down their genetic traits to more children, who will in turn be more likely to survive.

With the people who have relatively poorer senses of taste tending to die off with few or no offspring, and those with relatively better senses of taste tending to live longer and have more offspring, and these offspring having their parents' sense of taste, it makes perfect sense that before many generations have passed a population group would develop a sense of taste that matches, pretty well, their dietary requirements.

No intelligent design required.

God of the Gaps is just an embarrassing way of reasoning. But if you must do it, at least take a moment to be sure there's actually a gap there. If you don't -- and here you didn't -- then you're piling embarrassment upon embarrassment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
05-01-2017, 01:39 AM
RE: Intellegent design
Humans like meat therefore god? Theists hit a new low.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Szuchow's post
05-01-2017, 01:42 AM
RE: Intellegent design
(05-01-2017 01:39 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Humans like meat therefore god? Theists hit a new low.

You're right. We need a "Theists have hit a new low" thread.

Kinda like "quotes I want to remember", but the opposite. Laugh out load

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: