Branching Trees - A question for evolutionists

[timewerx]

It seems surprising that evolutionary processes would produce such an abundance of life (plants and trees) that physically emulate the very branching pattern of evolutionary common ancestry.
Do you think that is a strange coincidence?
Were plants and trees created in Evolution's image?

I used to work with high voltage electricity and electrical arcing also produces branching in precisely the same manner as tree branching.

But is however, formed by a difference mechanism that involves highly ionized plasma and vorticity.

Ironically, even a simple vortex in gas or liquid (like a tornado) can also exhibit branching in certain conditions.

Only one thing in common with these things and life itself is the vortex helix, in matter, and in our DNA. Strange coincidence.

 

[lifepsyop]

Given that the reality is that the inter-relationship of species does not match the form of a tree we can safely dismiss your speculation.

The tree is only an expression of the same basic branching pattern.

So, the kingdom of Life does not actually look like it evolved. Life appears to be simply conforming to a pattern we see instanced in everywhere else in the natural world.

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern. Because it is simply one more instance of a pattern that we find repeated in many other realms of nature.

Pedantry aside, really interested in a counter-argument if anyone has one.

 

[lifepsyop]

I used to work with high voltage electricity and electrical arcing also produces branching in precisely the same manner as tree branching.

But is however, formed by a difference mechanism that involves highly ionized plasma and vorticity.

Ironically, even a simple vortex in gas or liquid (like a tornado) can also exhibit branching in certain conditions.

Only one thing in common with these things and life itself is the vortex helix, in matter, and in our DNA. Strange coincidence.

Strange coincidence indeed....

Lichtenberg figure - Wikipedia

"Lichtenberg figures are fern-like patterns that may appear on the skin of lightning strike victims that disappear in 24 hours.[10]

A lightning strike can also create a large Lichtenberg figure in grass surrounding the point struck. These are sometimes found on golf courses or in grassy meadows.[11] Branching root-shaped "fulgurite" mineral deposits may also be created as sand and soil is fused into glassy tubes by the intense heat of the current.

The branching, self-similar patterns observed in Lichtenberg figures exhibit fractal properties. Lichtenberg figures often develop during the dielectric breakdown of solids, liquids, and even gases."


The way life can be organized into a "tree of life" speaks to some over-arching property of the physical world.

There's no reason to invoke an evolutionary creation story to explain such a pattern of life.

 

[Shemjaza]

Strange coincidence indeed....

Lichtenberg figure - Wikipedia

"Lichtenberg figures are fern-like patterns that may appear on the skin of lightning strike victims that disappear in 24 hours.[10]

A lightning strike can also create a large Lichtenberg figure in grass surrounding the point struck. These are sometimes found on golf courses or in grassy meadows.[11] Branching root-shaped "fulgurite" mineral deposits may also be created as sand and soil is fused into glassy tubes by the intense heat of the current.

The branching, self-similar patterns observed in Lichtenberg figures exhibit fractal properties. Lichtenberg figures often develop during the dielectric breakdown of solids, liquids, and even gases."


The way life can be organized into a "tree of life" speaks to some over-arching property of the physical world.

There's no reason to invoke an evolutionary creation story to explain such a pattern of life.

You keep repeating this, but it remains false.

The tree of life doesn't exist in the physical world, it's just a visualisation.

Can you explain the branches of life, explicitly, how they exist without evolution?

 

[lifepsyop]

You keep repeating this, but it remains false.

The tree of life doesn't exist in the physical world, it's just a visualisation.

Again, the tree is reflective of a basic branching pattern. The characterstics of living things tend to conform to a branching pattern. All sorts of other phenomena in the universe conforms to a branching pattern. Are you really not understanding this?

 

[Ophiolite]

The tree is only an expression of the same basic branching pattern.

The branching pattern of a tree is quite different from the branching pattern of the generations of life. They are not the same. Your argument is based upon their identity. They are not identical. In all important respects they are wholly different. Thus your argument is an empty one.

So, the kingdom of Life does not actually look like it evolved.

This is your opinion. Those who have devoted their lives to a study of the matter and are thus much better informed do not agree with you.

Life appears to be simply conforming to a pattern we see instanced in everywhere else in the natural world.

This is what you claim, but the pattern you are comparing the pattern of life with does not match. Only your ignorance of the detail could lead you confuse the two. Further, there are many other patterns in the natural world. It would be surprising if we could not find a rough match somewhere. (I've already offered one in an earlier post.)

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern..

Do you actually think that evolutionary theory has been developed because of some putative matching of patterns? Please don't be so ridiculous. We have evidence from anatomy, biochemistry, palaeontology, developmental biology, zoology, microbiology, botany and a bunch of other ologies that all point to and validate the theory.

Pedantry aside, really interested in a counter-argument if anyone has one.

A low-grade, ill-informed, inaccurate, incidental assertion doesn't require a counter argument, but I've given you one that has demolished your notion. Nice try, but no banana.

 

[Shemjaza]

Again, the tree is reflective of a basic branching pattern. The characterstics of living things tend to conform to a branching pattern. All sorts of other phenomena in the universe conforms to a branching pattern. Are you really not understanding this?

Yes, many things branch... but you can explain how they branch.

For example a river branches when the terrain causes the water to be split in two.

In the case of the diversity of life the how is easily explained by separated populations being differentiated by mutation... so evolution.

If not, please explain how the branch happens. You can't just keep saying "It isn't evolution, it's a branch!". A branch of what? How?

 

[pitabread]

Thus, there is no need or reason to invoke Evolution (Universal Common Ancestry) in order to explain why living things can be organized within such a branching structure pattern.

This is backwards. Evolution isn't about explaining why life can be organized into a branching pattern from a common ancestor.

Rather, it's the common ancestry of life that results in a branching pattern for subsequent descendants.

 

[lifepsyop]

The branching pattern of a tree is quite different from the branching pattern of the generations of life. They are not the same. Your argument is based upon their identity. They are not identical. In all important respects they are wholly different. Thus your argument is an empty one.

This is very unclear, whatever you're trying to say. And I never said anything was "identical".. An underlying pattern could manifest in many different ways depending on variable physical constraints in different environments.

 

[Ophiolite]

This is very unclear, whatever you're trying to say. And I never said anything was "identical".. An underlying pattern could manifest in many different ways depending on variable physical constraints in different environments.

I do not know how to make it any clearer.

The pattern of a nested hierarchy that results from descent with modification from a common ancestor is not the same as any other pattern in nature. What is unclear about that?

You are confusing a real, natural tree with the very rough, inaccurate metaphor/analogy of a tree. That metaphor/analogy supposedly represents the aforementioned nested hierarchy yet there are almost no similarities between the metaphor and the real tree. What is unclear about that?

Your inability to grasp what I am saying appears to be related to your insistence upon seeing close parallels where none exists; of confusing superficial and incidental similarities with real relationships.

 

[pitabread]

Your inability to grasp what I am saying appears to be related to your insistence upon seeing close parallels where none exists; of confusing superficial and incidental similarities with real relationships.

Sounds like Apophenia - Wikipedia

 

[Ophiolite]

Sounds like Apophenia - Wikipedia

And there was I thinking Apophenia was the third studio album by The Grateful Dead!

 

[timewerx]

The tree of life doesn't exist in the physical world, it's just a visualisation.

It exists in our physical world but not in a form most Christians can even remotely imagine.

This is one of the "mysteries of the Kingdom" the thing Jesus keeps saying to His disciples. This knowledge was never meant to be written nor shared. It's received directly from the Holy Spirit.

 

[Shemjaza]

It exists in our physical world but not in a form most Christians can even remotely imagine.

This is one of the "mysteries of the Kingdom" the thing Jesus keeps saying to His disciples. This knowledge was never meant to be written nor shared. It's received directly from the Holy Spirit.

But it isn't very mysterious.

The pattern of life is explicable. There are multiple lines of evidence that demonstrate it.

 

[timewerx]

But it isn't very mysterious.

The pattern of life is explicable. There are multiple lines of evidence that demonstrate it.

You don't know it either.

Back to topic, everything in the Universe, including life is strongly influenced by electromagnetic energy. Thus, is strongly influenced by Quantum Mechanical processes. Makes me wonder if anything is real at all.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Y... everything in the Universe, including life is strongly influenced by electromagnetic energy. Thus, is strongly influenced by Quantum Mechanical processes. Makes me wonder if anything is real at all.

Define 'real'. How would 'anything' be different if it wasn't 'real'?

 

[SLP]

No reason to accept creation, then, since it, too can be depicted as a tree-like pattern, with the as-yet unidentified "Kinds" as the trunks, and all of the hyper-evolution produced intra-kinds as the branches.

Cool that lifesy debunked creationism.

 

[Aman777]

It is often claimed that if God created living things, he did so in a way to look like Evolution, as if trying to trick people into believing all things had evolved from a universal common ancestor.

God did bring forth "every living creature that moveth" Genesis 1:21 from WATER exactly as Science has discovered. https://phys.org › Biology › Evolution › Cell & Microbiology

God created these living creatures on the 5th Day which was 3.8 Billion years ago, in man's time. What happened was that some unbelievers made up the ToE in order to eliminate God from His own Creation......BUT.....in doing so, they forgot about the flood.

They didn't know the SNARE or trap which God set for them with the flood, so they have been offending our little children in Public Schools for many years now, teaching the incomplete ToE which can NEVER tell us of our true Human origins. They also ignored the Scriptural fact that Adam's entire world, was totally destroyed in the flood. 2 Peter 3:6

 

[Aman777]

Can you explain the branches of life, explicitly, how they exist without evolution?

Sure. God created "every living creature that moveth" from water 13.8 billion years ago and life has descended with modifications from that point. In the mid 19th century unbelieving scientists changed the name from descent with modification to "evolution". This also allowed them to define the term so they dreamed up all kinds of speculations including that we evolved from the common ancestor of Apes.

When you ask them, NONE of them can tell us the process by which the superior intelligence of Creation Genesis 3:22 got inside prehistoric people, who did evolve from the common ancestor of Apes. Adam was made the THIRD Day Genesis 2:4-9 which was long BEFORE any other creature. That's God's Truth

 

[lifepsyop]

Yes, many things branch... but you can explain how they branch.

For example a river branches when the terrain causes the water to be split in two.

In the case of the diversity of life the how is easily explained by separated populations being differentiated by mutation... so evolution.

If not, please explain how the branch happens. You can't just keep saying "It isn't evolution, it's a branch!". A branch of what? How?

Nobody would say that the branches of a lightning bolt "evolved" in any Darwinian sense... it is simply the type of pattern we find repeating throughout the physical world.

When we see other phenomena like biodiversity conforming to a branching pattern, there is no need to invoke Darwinian mysticism (fish gradually transforming into philosophizing humans via happy genetic accidents, etc.) to explain it.

How the branch happens? I think you may as well ask, why do physical forces exist with particular properties? Why do we live in a universe with the physical parameters that make rivers and lightning possible the way they are?

These patterns in some way reflect the language of the creation of the universe.