Proof of design and impossibility of evolution.

[HumbleSiPilot77]

Bwahahaha, what the heck is this thing?

 

[SithDoughnut]

The transition from feeling vibrations to hearing, it's an ear, right? But for it develop to stage of "hearing", what's the inbetween steps? What's the process? It feels, then all of sudden hears? And if not, what's the inbetween step?

Why are you assuming that there is one? There is a point where inbetween steps no longer exist.

For example, I have blue eyes. If I had a child with brown eyes, that would be a mutation - part of evolution. What's the inbetween step between brown and blue eyes?

 

[Zoot]

Your just repeating the same exact point you brought. Perhaps you should address the points instead of repeating the exact same point you brought up.

AsktheFamily,

I will keep on bringing up the point until you answer it. You asked how gliding could develop gradually, and I explained. You responded by ignoring my explanation and repeating that gliding is somehow something special and different from jumping long distances.

You need to back up that statement.

Gradual changes would make for a better and better jumper. If the way the rodent became better at jumping was the increasingly wide flap of skin between limbs, it could reach a point where what had made it great at jumping also made it possible for that jump to become a glide.

You haven't actually refuted any part of that. If you can, please do. Don't just repeat your OP.

 

[Ayersy]

This is what the thread is about. I explained why and this is the purpose of the thread.

Seems typical of theists to me, cherry-picking the parts they like, and ignoring the parts they don't.

If macroevolution is possible, which you concede it is, then you can't just dismiss parts of it, because you don't like it.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Bwahahaha, what the heck is this thing?

It's called, rather unoriginally, a blobfish.

 

[AskTheFamily]

AsktheFamily,

I will keep on bringing up the point until you answer it. You asked how gliding could develop gradually, and I explained. You responded by ignoring my explanation and repeating that gliding is somehow something special and different from jumping long distances.

You need to back up that statement.

Gradual changes would make for a better and better jumper. If the way the rodent became better at jumping was the increasingly wide flap of skin between limbs, it could reach a point where what had made it great at jumping also made it possible for that jump to become a glide.

You haven't actually refuted any part of that. If you can, please do. Don't just repeat your OP.

Ok let's discuss it slowly then.


Creatures can become better jumpers. We agree.

Creatures can become more arao dymanic in their jumping, I agree.

Better legs, better shape, etc...

However, you suggest 1/10000th wing has something to do with better jumpiing and gliiding, but it really doesn't, if anything, it just has negative. Same with 1/10th witng.

What your thinking of is some sort of thing it has, that helps it glide and it improves on that. I am saying that 1/100000 wing doesn't help jump further or glide further.

You got to explain how 1/1000th wing does that, not talk about animals becoming better jumpers and this and that... We are taling about the development of the wing.

If it's getting better at jumping, 1/10000th of a lump of useless cells are not going to help?

All the stuff that makes it more aero dynamic doesn't it give gliders.

Your just making gliders appear somehow by some process while the process towards gliders that will develop to wings is not of advantage at all. The only possible improvement in gliding is in the aero dymanic shape of the body which is very little, and more has to do with the leg structure and how it can use it's power to jump.

But this is the point. I addressed your point. Please think abotu what I write, slowly. Then write this time. Or I am not going to respond if you just repeat the very first thing you stated in the 1st place.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

It's called, rather unoriginally, a blobfish.

It looks like a cartoon character, hilarious...

 

[Isambard]

BAm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Q2Db17v5U

AsktheFamily, you have yet to define "wing". Remember that there are completely different types of wings by different animals which independently evolved different forms of flight.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Ok let's discuss it slowly then.


Creatures can become better jumpers. We agree.

Creatures can become more arao dymanic in their jumping, I agree.

Better legs, better shape, etc...

However, you suggest 1/10000th wing has something to do with better jumpiing and gliiding, but it really doesn't, if anything, it just has negative. Same with 1/10th witng.

What your thinking of is some sort of thing it has, that helps it glide and it improves on that. I am saying that 1/100000 wing doesn't help jump further or glide further.

You got to explain how 1/1000th wing does that, not talk about animals becoming better jumpers and this and that... We are taling about the development of the wing.

If it's getting better at jumping, 1/10000th of a lump of useless cells are not going to help?

All the stuff that makes it more aero dynamic doesn't it give gliders.

Your just making gliders appear somehow by some process while the process towards gliders that will develop to wings is not of advantage at all. The only possible improvement in gliding is in the aero dymanic shape of the body which is very little, and more has to do with the leg structure and how it can use it's power to jump.

But this is the point. I addressed your point. Please think abotu what I write, slowly. Then write this time. Or I am not going to respond if you just repeat the very first thing you stated in the 1st place.

The problem is that it is you who is repeating yourself. You seem to think that changes have to be positive - they do not. And what do you actually mean by 1/1000 of a wing? The term makes no sense.

 

[AskTheFamily]

BAm
YouTube - 9th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism

AsktheFamily, you have yet to define "wing". Remember that there are completely different types of wings by different animals which independently evolved different forms of flight.

Well a wing we know and see. So something that glides leading to that process would be a wing as well.

Some random mutations of cells there, it's going to help? Zot is making jumping by legs + all of sudden development of gliders then wings. But the process to gliders, I said earlier that there is no advantage in those 1/1000thing wing/gliders, it doesn't help in jumping or gliding.

I hope you understand, like the fox, if it had something 1/100 thing of glider developing but it doesn't glide, it's useless.

The problem is if you keep thing in generalities and not look at it detail, it sounds some what reasonable. However, when you think of it in detail, those extra flesh that don't help glide developing over the legs, what good is it?

And you cannot mix wth that, that it can become better at jumping more aero dynamic, by getting stronger legs, and having better shape, it's two different things.

I have said this through out and I hope people can understand what I mean by 1/1000 thing.

A wing that glides not much I consider 100% wing. Ok? It can be come a better 100% wing, but it's a wing. I hope we are all clear.

A glider is a glider. I am talking about how it goes to become a glider. Extra flesh on the arms don't make it better glider. It has to have develop over a long process for it be a glider and make improvement.

Same with an ear. The person is now talking about blue eyes and brown eyes. It just goes boom from non-hearing to hearing. Non-detection lump to a detecting lupm. This is randomly possible? It's not possible. There is no inbetween process.

And how everything relies on each other, I talked about that, but someone called it ignorance and has not addressed the points made.

Perhaps Creationist are not these dumbies you think they are? Perhaps it's the evolutionist. Just perhaps most of humanity now and before, is right, and you guys are the ones wrong about this? Have some humble pie, it won't hurt.

 

[Zoot]

Creatures can become better jumpers. We agree.

Yep.

Creatures can become more arao dymanic in their jumping, I agree.

Yep.

Better legs, better shape, etc...

Yep.

However, you suggest 1/10000th wing has something to do with better jumpiing and gliiding, but it really doesn't, if anything, it just has negative. Same with 1/10th witng.

What your thinking of is some sort of thing it has, that helps it glide and it improves on that. I am saying that 1/100000 wing doesn't help jump further or glide further.

You got to explain how 1/1000th wing does that, not talk about animals becoming better jumpers and this and that... We are taling about the development of the wing.

If it's getting better at jumping, 1/10000th of a lump of useless cells are not going to help?

All the stuff that makes it more aero dynamic doesn't it give gliders.

It can. The wider flap of skin between the limbs on the rodent makes it more aero-dynamic, makes it a better jumper, and if it continues on that trend, what began as jump-enhancers can become gliders - not all at once, but gradually, and not used for gliding to begin with.

Your just making gliders appear somehow by some process while the process towards gliders that will develop to wings is not of advantage at all. The only possible improvement in gliding is in the aero dymanic shape of the body which is very little, and more has to do with the leg structure and how it can use it's power to jump.

But this is the point. I addressed your point. Please think abotu what I write, slowly. Then write this time. Or I am not going to respond if you just repeat the very first thing you stated in the 1st place.

The problem is that you are thinking of the development of a wing only in terms of what it becomes. A tenth of a wing won't help you fly, but that doesn't mean it won't help you at all - it could help you jump further. A tenth of a prehensile tail won't help you hang off a branch by it, but might give you better balance.

Your argument rests on the idea that the only kind of advantage the predecessor of a wing could give is flight, and because the predecessor of the wing can't provide flight, you claim there is no advantage to the mutation and therefore no way it would develop over time into a wing.

But you are not considering that a mutation that eventually provides one kind of advantage could have provided different advantages at earlier stages.

 

[Chicken Little]

"But cells and evolved things such as the eye and ear and wings and the like are not necessarily on such a strict basis. The example of teh eye has been quite soundly debunked by virtue of the gradation example. An organism with a patch that detects light is eventually able to deepen and contrast degrees of light and then deepen further to focus and eventually we progress by degrees to the eye that humans have or the eye that other animals have. "

Scientism has never found a transitional anything ever.
The only thing transitional between anything is us..
we are the only thing between two rows of teeth build to chew forever and lucy and we are headed to Lucy..
Sciwentism can't find and never have found and will never find any kind of transitional anything! much less they will never get to what we were created to be because they don't have a clue what that is..

heck they are still looking in the mirror, just so impressed about how much prettier and smarter than a monkey they are!! Scientism will never get there because They are not even looking where they have to go .. they don't have a clue they need to look back to find the real original forms He created us in ...

the only thing between the original creation (probably known as the 'sons of GOD..(. ie thus meaning "our original form" or " our created form that was in God's own image"....) and LUCY is just ol' us, in this our very fallen state!
" you shall surely die" oh yes sir something died in us that day and we lost a whole dimension and a lot of us and the laws of life degraded/decayed .......and now we are headed to lucy!

so have fun there fellows looking for all those transitional forms of where mankind has really never ever been before. oh yes but we sure are headed that way.
at this rate I have no doubts we can get to lucy very quickly... even very very quickly..

 

[Isambard]

Yeah, the reason why ppl don't understand 1/1000 wing is because its semantic nonsense. Its like saying "1/1000 arm or 1/1000 fat", etc etc.

Anyways, semantic garbage aside, here is a vid on the evolution of the wing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrlhrbUxiMs&feature=related

EDIT: Found better vid.

 

[Zoot]

Scientism has never found a transitional anything ever.
The only thing transitional between anything is us..
we are the only thing between two rows of teeth build to chew forever and lucy and we are headed to Lucy..
Sciwentism can't find and never have found and will never find any kind of transitional anything! much less they will never get to what we were created to be because they don't have a clue what that is..

Every species is transitional.

 

[Isambard]

Scientism has never found a transitional anything ever.
The only thing transitional between anything is us..
we are the only thing between two rows of teeth build to chew forever and lucy and we are headed to Lucy..
Sciwentism can't find and never have found and will never find any kind of transitional anything! much less they will never get to what we were created to be because they don't have a clue what that is..

heck they are still looking in the mirror, just so impressed about how much prettier and smarter than a monkey they are!! Scientism will never get there because They are not even looking where they have to go .. they don't have a clue they need to look back to find the real original forms He created us in ...

the only thing between the original creation (probably known as the 'sons of GOD..(. ie thus meaning "our original form" or " our created form that was in God's own image"....) and LUCY is just ol' us, in this our very fallen state!
" you shall surely die" oh yes sir something died in us that day and we lost a whole dimension and a lot of us and the laws of life degraded/decayed .......and now we are headed to lucy!

so have fun there fellows looking for all those transitional forms of where mankind has really never ever been before. oh yes but we sure are headed that way.
at this rate I have no doubts we can get to lucy very quickly... even very very quickly..

Hey look, transitional fossils!
YouTube - 9th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism

 

[AskTheFamily]

The problem is that it is you who is repeating yourself. You seem to think that changes have to be positive - they do not. And what do you actually mean by 1/1000 of a wing? The term makes no sense.

The changes has to be prositive, because it won't lead to design if there is no constant postive change leading to that design.

You can't just say bunch of random mutations happened, there was no advantage, but one day, it became a wing, and not only that, but the whole body was developed with that wing to glide or fly.

I've read evolution books, I'm not unaware. Yes some traits can be passed down that are not advantagoues but it won't lead to huge change, the huge change in design is through this picking and choosing explained by natural selection.

Try to think clearly as well as in detail, and don't just stick to words in generality to refute detailed arguments that are valid and sound.

 

[Zoot]

The changes has to be prositive, because it won't lead to design if there is no constant postive change leading to that design.

You can't just say bunch of random mutations happened, there was no advantage, but one day, it became a wing, and not only that, but the whole body was developed with that wing to glide or fly.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, there can be advantage without it being the the final advantage.

 

[Isambard]

The changes has to be prositive, because it won't lead to design if there is no constant postive change leading to that design.

You can't just say bunch of random mutations happened, there was no advantage, but one day, it became a wing, and not only that, but the whole body was developed with that wing to glide or fly.

I've read evolution books, I'm not unaware. Yes some traits can be passed down that are not advantagoues but it won't lead to huge change, the huge change in design is through this picking and choosing explained by natural selection.

Try to think clearly as well as in detail, and don't just stick to words in generality to refute detailed arguments that are valid and sound.

See the video I posted. It addresses your question of a 1/1000 wing.

 

[AskTheFamily]

Its like saying "1/1000 arm"

I know, an arm is just as another example. Useless arm is useless arm. It has to be useful, and then it improves on being on arm to better arm.

This is what I am saying. You can't just give something a glider adn say it improves on that, and then it becomes a wing. There is a process slow over very very long time, like evolutionist say, so it can't just go bang "glider" then imrpovement on glider.

Same with an arm. You can't have 1/10 of an arm developing, it's totally useless.

Wing is not the only thing. Concious, logic, seeing, hearing, all this, I explained, it applies ot that to.

It's either concious or no concious. It's either things can think logically or they can't. Logic is not that it can be faulty and correct, it's either there and you can use it and it can distinguish right and wrong and conclude things true or it's not. We can misuse logic, yet it's not a flaw of logic we been given.

There is all sorts of things you can think of. But an arm is a good example. A 1/10th arm would be of no advantage.

So either it's an arm or it isn't. Once it's an arm, it can become better, stronger, etc.. but a 1/10 arm hanging on the sides of a creature is totally useless and would not lead to design of a full arm.

 

[AskTheFamily]

As I have repeatedly pointed out, there can be advantage without it being the the final advantage.

Yes you can repeat, and just assert it, and then think it's true. Alright. We're done.