- Mar 14, 2010
- 2,854
- 195
- 39
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Muslim
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-NDP
Upvote
0
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.
If you're going to ignore the answers and evidence you are requesting, then there's no value in continuing the conversation.
I have not simply talked about beneficial, I talked about it needing direction. So let's say some extra skin help in something, it still needs to have direction towards gliding, but gliding has a design, and you can't just imagine somehow it just went towards that, when there is no reason by the process for it to go towards that direction.
So as I said, even a if a little extra skin helped in falling, for it to move towards gliding is whole different thing, as gliding has design.
It's funny, I was out and about in town today during lunch with one of my best mates, we encountered a Christian guy who gave us a leaflet, entitled 'Evolution: the evidence for and against'. It was an argument that involved calling evolution a faith, offering $250,000 for anyone who could prove evolution (for some reason it was in dollars, not pounds), asking you to carry out an experiment by clearing your garage and seeing whether or not a Mercedes evolves from nothing over a period of time, saying the Bible was very much the divinely inspired word of God, and essentially calling people to the truth of Jesus Christ. Although I agreed with the overall shameless proselytism of the leaflet, the arguments against evolution were admittedly poor.
This thread just reminded me of that incident
* NOTE: When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:
1. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
2. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
3. Matter created life by itself.
4. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals).
I think this is your main misconception. Why does it need direction?
(I don't really buy this specially by the fact that you would expect the creatures that don't fall to survive more and that avoidance of falling to be passed on instead)
Well for example, the fox develops more skin, it helps control, all this extra control, is not heading towards a gliding type structure. A gliding type structure is designed. It's not random.
No it isn't. It could end up as a gliding mechanism though. Evolution doesn't 'head towards' anything.So let's say flies. They got some extra skin. Let's say this makes them fall a little less hard (I don't really buy this specially by the fact that you would expect the creatures that don't fall to survive more and that avoidance of falling to be passed on instead), it is not heading towards gliding.
Why not?Gliding is a design in itself. Whatever type of creature it is. If the process is not heading towards that structure, it would make it. The extra control won't make it head towards gliding.
That's entirely wrong. Natural selection leads the the adaptation of species to their local environment. If the environment changes (and it regularly does), then the creatures that survive the best will adapt to this new environment, which may or may not involve dramatic changes.It will just make it had to more control, but it will never skip to that step of gliding. You guys jsut imaginei t going to that step while is not logical by the process of natural selection. The natural selection will it make better at what it's doing, it won't make it go towards soemthing entirely different.
No it doesn't. However, it still could. If the speed of falling is reduced, then the species can make longer jumps to get food or avoid predators. These individuals will be the ones most likely to pass on their genes, and over time this adaptation may become the standard.Although gliding is a sort of reducing fall, it doesn't mean the reducing fall will lead to it.
The thing is that gliding is slow falling. The two things are not unrelated because they are essentially the same thing.Extra skin reducing fall is one thing, but it ever developing to a glider needs direction. It improving it reduction of fall, will not make it head towards gliding. This is the logical fallacy on your part, because it's unrelated. It's two different things even though both reduce fall.
It improving on falling does not imply it's heading towards a design of gliding. Because until it glides, there is no relationship to that reducing fall and a wing. At all. So there is no transitional process.
No it isn't. It could end up as a gliding mechanism though. Evolution doesn't 'head towards' anything.
The thing is that gliding is slow falling. The two things are not unrelated because they are essentially the same thing.
It needs directing towards that by natural selection. You can't have it get there without natural selection leading up to it.
No they are unrelated even if they both reduce fall. They are not the same thing, and it's you making it the same thing that you imagine somehow there is a process that leads to design of gliding.
A bee for example, if it becomes better at falling, it's a whole different thing for it begin growing a flaping type wing or glider. It doesn't head, because the extra skin leading to that, is not reducing anything.
A little triangular shape for example coming of the side of something, like less the milimeter long, doesn't reduce falling let alone going towards a glider.
It's a whole different mechanism that will reduce impact of falling and become more resistance to air.
It won't lead to a glider that will become a wing. It's obvious. And you can think Dawkins answers it, it's really up to you. God gave us all a mind and we are tested on how we use it.
What you said is completely irrelevant to my points and arguments and what I meant by guided is something else then what you mean.
It guides things in improvement. So this is what I mean. So there needs to be a direction it's heading.
Well Evolutions (sic) and Creations (sic) agree that there is Design in creation.
Creationist say there is Ultimate Creator, while evolutionist say that the process of mutations + natural selection + genetic variation, guides the process, and itself is a designer. It guides things in improvement. So this is what I mean. So there needs to be a direction it's heading.
No, it most likely cannot, but we're not going to type a really long page of "and the a little more nub, and a little more, and a little more, a little more half-wingish, a little more, a little more, etc"I think we all getting repetative now and also people are making things up, like a half wing can just pop out of a mutation which is not true.
I think we all agree that all should study science in more detail.
I showed a way of looking at things differently, and I feel if we look at creation this way, and analyze it, it's evident there is a Designer.
I say you can apply this logic to Ears, arms, legs, and systems (lungs, heart, etc) and you will see that it really can't just happen by this random mutations + survival of the fittest + genetic variation.
Well Evolutions and Creations agree that there is Design in creation.
It guides things in improvement. So this is what I mean. So there needs to be a direction it's heading.
I think we all getting repetative now and also people are making things up, like a half wing can just pop out of a mutation which is not true.
I think we all agree that all should study science in more detail. It has to be very small changes specially because mutations don't make new stuff appear,
it jumbles what is already there, and it will be very slight changes, and very slight, means very very slight, so there is no, "gliding" sturcture "pop" thing with a mutation. It doesn't happen. But you can imagine it. And reducement in fall or control in jumps, all this doesn't lead to it, and I've explained why already, and this is what I meant by guided, as by natural selection, there is no improving till it reaches that gliding wing type structure at all.
I showed a way of looking at things differently, and I feel if we look at creation this way, and analyze it, it's evident there is a Designer.
I say you can apply this logic to Ears, arms, legs, and systems (lungs, heart, etc) and you will see that it really can't just happen by this random mutations + survival of the fittest + genetic variation.
AskTheFamily I fear that you are a Muppet, a Muppet is someone who is operated like a puppet but through the mind, they tell you something that you really don't understand and then tell you to go out and tell other people what they have told you, you then come unstuck because the people you tell start to ask questions you can not answer, this only serves to show the people you tell that you really don't know what you are talking about, the only answer to this problem would seem to be that you either go back for more tuition by the puppet masters or you start thinking for yourself, as the latter is obviously not what you are good at you should return to them for further instructions.Well Evolutions and Creations agree that there is Design in creation. Creationist say there is Ultimate Creator, while evolutionist say that the process of mutations + natural selection + genetic variation, guides the process, and itself is a designer.
Tuition it is then, good.AskTheFamily I fear that you are a Muppet, a Muppet is someone who is operated like a puppet but through the mind, they tell you something that you really don't understand and then tell you to go out and tell other people what they have told you, you then come unstuck because the people you tell start to ask questions you can not answer, this only serves to show the people you tell that you really don't know what you are talking about, the only answer to this problem would seem to be that you either go back for more tuition by the puppet masters or you start thinking for yourself, as the latter is obviously not what you are good at you should return to them for further instructions.
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?