Direction of Evolution

[dickyh995]

i gave evidences for the claim that those ervs arent the product of viral infections. so its indeed support the claim that those ervs are an integral part of the genome. if you want evidence for design i can give you some.

I would love to see evidence for the design please?

 

[xianghua]

I would love to see evidence for the design please?

you can start with this one:

best argument against evolution? (the self replicating robot)

 

[PsychoSarah]

you can start with this one:

best argument against evolution? (the self replicating robot)

A robot that can replicate itself has no bearing on the evolution of organic life, as its functions would be, inevitably, different from organic life.

 

[xianghua]

A robot that can replicate itself has no bearing on the evolution of organic life, as its functions would be, inevitably, different from organic life.

i actually do refer to an organic robot.

 

[PsychoSarah]

i actually do refer to an organic robot.

If it has no distinction from the life processes of normal organic life, then it would be an artificial organism, not a robot.

Furthermore, anyone that would be willing to put forth the effort in creating such a thing would collect evidence of it and make it distinguishable from non-created life in some manner. Record and replicate the process of doing so and whatnot.

 

[xianghua]

If it has no distinction from the life processes of normal organic life, then it would be an artificial organism, not a robot.
.

why actually? where is the limit between a robot and an organism?

 

[PsychoSarah]

why actually? where is the limit between a robot and an organism?

-_- we aren't machines. Or programmable. We lack a certain level of purpose and consistency seen in machines. Even a machine designed to imitate life would only be that, and have no significant potential to become more than that or deviate from its programming in any productive way.

 

[xianghua]

-_- we aren't machines. Or programmable. We lack a certain level of purpose and consistency seen in machines.

but what is that feature that will make them so different? i dont think there is such one. for example: lets say that i will made a watch that made from organic components and have a self replicating system. do you agree that we can call it a watch, or you will call it an organism?

 

[Jimmy D]

you can start with this one:

best argument against evolution? (the self replicating robot)

In what way is that evidence?

 

[PsychoSarah]

but what is that feature that will make them so different? i dont think there is such one. for example: lets say that i will made a watch that made from organic components and have a self replicating system. do you agree that we can call it a watch, or you will call it an organism?

-_- it is both things. However, no matter how hard you tried, it wouldn't be very good at being a watch.

 

[SkyWriting]

First 'rule' of evolution suggests that life is destined to become more complex

No such rule exists. This explains why you have no live links.

 

[SkyWriting]

The only rule is a permanent departure from the original type.

Impossible to claim or prove.

No such rule exists.

 

[xianghua]

-_- it is both things. However, no matter how hard you tried, it wouldn't be very good at being a watch.

so a watch that made from organic components and have a self replication system isnt a watch but an organism?

 

[SkyWriting]

Looking back through the last 550 million years of the fossil catalogue to the present day, the team investigated the different evolutionary branches of the crustacean family tree.

The study has no backing.....it's been 10 years.

 

[PsychoSarah]

so a watch that made from organic components and have a self replication system isnt a watch but an organism?

It would make for a very poor watch, given that gears and other spinning components are not something a living, organic organism can sustain.

 

[xianghua]

It would make for a very poor watch, given that gears and other spinning components are not something a living, organic organism can sustain.

first; we have found gears in nature too:

This Tiny Bug Has a Gear in its Leg

and secondly: the question is if it will be a watch or not. i do think it will be a watch.

 

[PsychoSarah]

first; we have found gears in nature too:

This Tiny Bug Has a Gear in its Leg

and secondly: the question is if it will be a watch or not. i do think it will be a watch.

-_- the issue was the 360 degree rotation, not gear shape. That insect does not have anything in its body that rotates 360 degrees

 

[xianghua]

-_- the issue was the 360 degree rotation, not gear shape. That insect does not have anything in its body that rotates 360 degrees

an atp synthase and flagellum can makes a 360 degree rotation:

 

[PsychoSarah]

an atp synthase and flagellum can makes a 360 degree rotation:

So you want the watch to be microscopic? Also, the issue lies in multicellular organisms having tissues which rotate 360 degrees, not individual cells. My apologies for not making the distinction, since I assumed your watch would be the size of an actual watch. So, multicellular organisms cannot have groups of cells rotate 360 degrees because they'd be unable to stay attached to the surrounding cell matter to the extent needed to promote the movement. Also, of course ATP synthase can rotate 360 degrees, its not even an organelle.

So, to clarify, parts of individual cells can rotate 360 degrees, but cells connected to each other cannot. So, unless you want to make a relatively inaccurate biological clock so small you can't read it without a microscope, you are out of luck. To stop any possibility that you might try to claim that it be a single celled organism the size of a watch, there are biological limits to how large an individual cell can be. It has to do with the surface area to volume ratio, and obtaining nutrients. To be fair, the largest single cell can be up to a foot in length (30.5 cm), but only thanks to being an aquatic, photosynthetic cell with many nuclei. I also assume you want the watch to work without having it stay under water. The large overall cell size wouldn't make up for the fact that it would still have tiny organelles, so you still wouldn't be able to read the watch that way.

 

[The Stamp]

What would an earth look like that was not designed? would it look exactly like an earth that was designed?