Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
He's obviously talking about the thing the picture depicts. Not the picture.Because it's just a picture. Send it back for a refund, you won't be driving it anywhere. You could print it out though, if that helps.
D'oh! [/homer]He's obviously talking about the thing the picture depicts. Not the picture.
Ha! Or perhaps a robot penguin.No - looks like a self-replicating watch to me.
or a self replicating JPG of a robot wrist-penguinHa! Or perhaps a robot penguin.
So you accept such a thing exists? But it couldn't evolve stepwise, therefore God designed it.or a self replicating JPG of a robot wrist-penguin
thanks. so if a bicycle was able to evolve naturally (without a designer) then we cant consider it as a bicycle. right? by the way (just as a note): english isnt my native so i may not understand some of your words.
no. im talking about a regular bicycles. means without the ability to reproduce. so if such a bicycles will evolve naturally you will not consider it as a bicycles. right?Ah, but, part of the requirement for evolution is that it happens across generations - a single individual will not evolve. So if bicycles evolve, then they must reproduce, and if they reproduce, they are not bicycles, are they?
How the heck can there be evolution without the ability to reproduce?no. im talking about a regular bicycles. means without the ability to reproduce. so if such a bicycles will evolve naturally
no. im talking about a regular bicycles. means without the ability to reproduce. so if such a bicycles will evolve naturally you will not consider it as a bicycles. right?
Kylie gave this definition of a bicycle:no. im talking about a regular bicycles. means without the ability to reproduce. so if such a bicycles will evolve naturally you will not consider it as a bicycles. right?
no. im talking about a regular bicycles. means without the ability to reproduce. so if such a bicycles will evolve naturally you will not consider it as a bicycles. right?
What you are talking about makes no sense. Evolution REQUIRES reproduction. If bicycles can't reproduce, then they can't evolve. If something evolves, then whatever it is, it isn't a bicycle.
What I don't see is how it reproduces. Does it have reproductive organs? A genome? Are there male and female bicycles, or does it reproduce by binary fission?its an hypothetical question. lets assume that this bicycle evolved in front of your eyes:
(image from X-Rated Spektor BMX Bike 20" Wheel)
now, since your definition for bicycle required design, its not a bicycle by definition. you see now why definitions are problematic?
That's not how it works. Populations evolve, not individuals.its an hypothetical question. lets assume that this bicycle evolved in front of your eyes...
By "evolve in front of my eyes" you mean I observe generations upon generations of some objects having sex, getting pregant, bearing offspring, and at some point this bicycle is born?its an hypothetical question. lets assume that this bicycle evolved in front of your eyes:
No, definitions are not problematic. The problem lies 100% in your ridiculous fantasies. Bicycles cannot, and never will, reproduce. That's not a problem with the definition of a bicycle, it's a problem with your fantasy.now, since your definition for bicycle required design, its not a bicycle by definition. you see now why definitions are problematic?
It appears to me that, years from now, folks will still be explaining to xianghua that bicycles do not have babies.What you are talking about makes no sense. Evolution REQUIRES reproduction. If bicycles can't reproduce, then they can't evolve. If something evolves, then whatever it is, it isn't a bicycle.
Here's a helpful diagram:
View attachment 214036
Makes you wonder if he's impersonating Edward Smith?It appears to me that, years from now, folks will still be explaining to xianghua that bicycles do not have babies.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?