The 'evolution' of food

loveofourlord · Nov 6, 2019

Ken Everett said:
Our most recent studies of DNA (and the rate at which DNA can change) suggests that billions of years (even the estimated 43 billion year existence of the universe) would not be enough time for the complex life forms found in plant and animal species on earth to 'evolve', even if this process of evolution was capable of adding DNA information in propagation of species.

Every single argument offered as a probable answer to the process whereby life came to be on earth as it is now, requires conjecture and unseen, unmeasured and unprovable processes.

If one conservatively quantifies every single cosmic, astronomical, chemical, biological and other factor that is required to support sentient life on earth, it would be found that the odds of there being such life, dependent on all the infinitesimally fine-tuned variables, are just one in ten the the power two million!

So evolutionists have a 1 in 10¬2000000 chance that intelligent design is not the answer to the question of life on earth.

These are not odds that any rationally-minded person would be prepared to take.

how do you even remotly get the figure of billions of years? This sounds like the usual nonsense of a mathmetician not understanding how evolution works trying to work backwards from what we have now. And usually leaving out natural selection and just leaving it as 100% random to get things. the average person has 50 mutations within them not from their parents, most changes between species are very small number of changes, I forget what it was as it was years ago, but like one of the genes that helped to give humans a bigger brain is only 14 mutations from that of a ape, plus it's not like, "Well this gene mutates to be bigger, while this one mutates then to give a knee, these thigns are happpening often at the same time.

Shemjaza · Nov 6, 2019

Ken Everett said:
Our most recent studies of DNA (and the rate at which DNA can change) suggests that billions of years (even the estimated 43 billion year existence of the universe) would not be enough time for the complex life forms found in plant and animal species on earth to 'evolve', even if this process of evolution was capable of adding DNA information in propagation of species.

Every single argument offered as a probable answer to the process whereby life came to be on earth as it is now, requires conjecture and unseen, unmeasured and unprovable processes.

If one conservatively quantifies every single cosmic, astronomical, chemical, biological and other factor that is required to support sentient life on earth, it would be found that the odds of there being such life, dependent on all the infinitesimally fine-tuned variables, are just one in ten the the power two million!

So evolutionists have a 1 in 10¬2000000 chance that intelligent design is not the answer to the question of life on earth.

These are not odds that any rationally-minded person would be prepared to take.

Under the definitions of information I've seen, mutations are able to add information to DNA.

If there is a problem could you please define what you mean by information and if there is an objective way to measure it and in what units?

I'd be interested in seeing how those probability maths work. Most instances I've seen have made grave errors about how evolution and mutation work.

Also, why on Earth is it reasonable to assume an intelligent designer without reason or evidence? If life forming from the laws and chemicals of the universe is unlikely, why is the spontaneous existence of universe shaping intelligences likely?

FrumiousBandersnatch · Nov 7, 2019

Ken Everett said:
So some chemicals (which accidentally formed from free atoms) combined to form the building blocks of plant life. These found a way to synthesize energy from the sun. They rearranged themselves into thousands of different food types which just happen to contain some of the 93 elements in the periodic table which are required in finely tuned amounts to support life in human (and animal) cells. In a stroke of serendipity, they also removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and generated oxygen.
What was the process and driving force behind this process? How did evolution steer this amazing sequence of events to the final products?

The vast majority, if not all, food plants in modern diets have been selectively bred by mankind to our preferences - typically greater volume and better taste.

You might find this article informative: Crop origins and evolution.

Over time, selective breeding modifies teosinte's few fruitcases (left) into modern corn's rows of exposed kernels (right). (Photo courtesy of John Doebley.). From: Genetically Modified Corn— Environmental Benefits and Risks Gewin V PLoS Biology Vol. 1, No. 1, e8 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000008

Kylie · Nov 9, 2019

Ken Everett said:
I see a number of Christian and non-believers subscribe to the notion of evolution. It is my opinion that evolution is impossible, and I believe my opinion is supported by (the Bible and) DNA.
I have a question for those who actually think evolution is real: can you please explain to me, using Darwinian logic, how and why the plethora of tasty and nutritious plants, vegetables and fruits evolved?

Plants were benefitted when they gave their seeds a source of nutrients that the seeds could use to grow before they were able to make their own food via photosynthesis.

Animals took advantage of this readily available nutrient source and started eating it themselves.

So plants took advantage of this in order to get animals to eat their seeds. The seeds could pass through the animal's digestive tract without injury and would be deposited elsewhere when the animal pooped, thus helping the plant spread its seeds.

As for why fruits are tasty, they did not evolve to be tasty for our benefit. We evolved to find good food sources tasty and poor food sources unpleasant to stop us from eating things that would be bad for us. Things rich in sugar or fat generally appealed to us, since both of these were important things for us. Fruits, rich in sugar, were thus things we found tasty.

yeshuaslavejeff · Nov 9, 2019

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
The vast majority, if not all, food plants in modern diets have been selectively bred by mankind to our preferences - typically greater volume and better taste.

I think MORE PROFIT is the reason, NOT our preferences by far.

FreeinChrist · Nov 10, 2019

ADVISOR HAT

This thread was moved from Physical & Life Sciences to the Creation & Evolution subforum.

loveofourlord · Nov 10, 2019

yeshuaslavejeff said:
I think MORE PROFIT is the reason, NOT our preferences by far.

oh yeah trying to turn the unedible fruit into banana's was very lucrative profit margins milenium ago.

ViaCrucis · Nov 13, 2019

Ken Everett said:
I see a number of Christian and non-believers subscribe to the notion of evolution. It is my opinion that evolution is impossible, and I believe my opinion is supported by (the Bible and) DNA.
I have a question for those who actually think evolution is real: can you please explain to me, using Darwinian logic, how and why the plethora of tasty and nutritious plants, vegetables and fruits evolved?

We evolved to find the plants, vegetables, and fruits tasty.

Plants evolving seed-dispersal mechanisms goes hand in hand with the evolution of us finding things tasty.

A yummy piece of fruit is yummy because we evolved to find sugars pleasurable to taste, because calories = being alive, and sugars are basically cheap calories. This is happening in tandem with plants adapting their seed-dispersal strategies to take advantage of this.

Evolution is happening within a complex set of relationships of organisms existing in an ecosystem.

Animals evolved in response to plants, the plants evolved in response to animals.

And in the case of most of the produce we consume today--virtually all of it is the result of hundreds, if not thousands of years of artificial selection through agriculture. Basically nothing we eat can be found in the wild. So that's just an added twist on top of it. In other words, a lot of the tasty things we eat are tasty because we made them tasty. On purpose.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis · Nov 13, 2019

Kylie said:
Plants were benefitted when they gave their seeds a source of nutrients that the seeds could use to grow before they were able to make their own food via photosynthesis.

Animals took advantage of this readily available nutrient source and started eating it themselves.

So plants took advantage of this in order to get animals to eat their seeds. The seeds could pass through the animal's digestive tract without injury and would be deposited elsewhere when the animal pooped, thus helping the plant spread its seeds.

As for why fruits are tasty, they did not evolve to be tasty for our benefit. We evolved to find good food sources tasty and poor food sources unpleasant to stop us from eating things that would be bad for us. Things rich in sugar or fat generally appealed to us, since both of these were important things for us. Fruits, rich in sugar, were thus things we found tasty.

That's what I was trying to say in my post above. You said it much better than I did though.

-CryptoLutheran

OldWiseGuy · Dec 10, 2019

Brightmoon said:
Intelligent Design is a pseudoscience explanation created specifically in the USA to evade our laws against teaching pseudoscience nonsense in the public school system .

It isn’t even good theology as it’s a not very sophisticated god-of-the-gaps argument

It's an odds thing.

Chances of evolution: Too small to calculate.
Chances of creation: 100 percent.

Bungle_Bear · Dec 10, 2019

OldWiseGuy said:
It's an odds thing.

Chances of evolution: Too small to calculate.
Chances of creation: 100 percent.

You got those the wrong way round, and you know it. Shame on you.

OldWiseGuy · Dec 10, 2019

Bungle_Bear said:
You got those the wrong way round, and you know it. Shame on you.

"I calls 'em the way I sees 'em." -Red Skelton (and OldWiseGuy)

Shemjaza · Dec 11, 2019

OldWiseGuy said:
It's an odds thing.

Chances of evolution: Too small to calculate.
Chances of creation: 100 percent.

Except that isn't accurate.

You feel that evolution isn't true.
And you feel that creation is true.

You don't actually know the chances because you don't have and objective evidence and analysis to base that on. Pretending that your feelings amount to reliable analysis is dishonest.

People have pointed out this difference to you on multiple occasions. I suspect you phrase it this way on purpose to get a rise or of people.

Kylie · Dec 11, 2019

OldWiseGuy said:
It's an odds thing.

Chances of evolution: Too small to calculate.
Chances of creation: 100 percent.

Care to show your working?

pitabread · Dec 11, 2019

OldWiseGuy said:
It's an odds thing.

No, no it isn't.

Nithavela · Dec 11, 2019

Ken Everett said:
I see a number of Christian and non-believers subscribe to the notion of evolution.

The vast majority, actually.

[...]can you please explain to me, using Darwinian logic, how and why the plethora of tasty and nutritious plants, vegetables and fruits evolved?

God put them into the garden of eden. Sadly, they didn't make it out of the garden, so they had to evolve again as a means of making animals eat them and help propagating the plants. Then man came around and selectively bred them to become ever more nutritious. And then god shaped the banana in a way that made it fit perfectly into the human hand, and then satan meddled and now it's facing away from the face so humans have to starve.

Nithavela · Dec 11, 2019

Ken Everett said:
So some chemicals (which accidentally formed from free atoms) combined to form the building blocks of plant life. These found a way to synthesize energy from the sun. They rearranged themselves into thousands of different food types which just happen to contain some of the 93 elements in the periodic table which are required in finely tuned amounts to support life in human (and animal) cells. In a stroke of serendipity, they also removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and generated oxygen.
What was the process and driving force behind this process? How did evolution steer this amazing sequence of events to the final products?

How do you figure the current state is the final product.

We are only a minor dominant species in earths history that will be gone in a few centuries.

VirOptimus · Dec 11, 2019

Ken Everett said:
I see a number of Christian and non-believers subscribe to the notion of evolution. It is my opinion that evolution is impossible, and I believe my opinion is supported by (the Bible and) DNA.
I have a question for those who actually think evolution is real: can you please explain to me, using Darwinian logic, how and why the plethora of tasty and nutritious plants, vegetables and fruits evolved?

Evolution=observed fact

The theory of evolution=the explanation of how evolution works.

You dont get to make up your own facts.

VirOptimus · Dec 11, 2019

OldWiseGuy said:
It's an odds thing.

Chances of evolution: Too small to calculate.
Chances of creation: 100 percent.

So you dont understand probability either.

Why am I not surprised?

OldWiseGuy · Dec 11, 2019

Nithavela said:
The vast majority, actually.

God put them into the garden of eden. Sadly, they didn't make it out of the garden, so they had to evolve again as a means of making animals eat them and help propagating the plants. Then man came around and selectively bred them to become ever more nutritious. And then god shaped the banana in a way that made it fit perfectly into the human hand, and then satan meddled and now it's facing away from the face so humans have to starve.

So many natural foods are just the right size. Curious.

The 'evolution' of food

Newbie

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Defeater of Illogic

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

CF Advisory team

Newbie

Confessional Lutheran

Confessional Lutheran

Wake me when it's soup.

Whoot!

Wake me when it's soup.

Regular Member

Defeater of Illogic

Well-Known Member

our world is happy and mundane

our world is happy and mundane

A nihilist who cares.

A nihilist who cares.

Wake me when it's soup.

Similar threads