Symetry

[CabVet]

Think about the superior movement of a flying saucer. It is a 2D sphere.

You are right, the gravity gives a limitation to the vertical movement. But why aren't most lives disk in shape?

A disk is a disk, not a 2D "sphere". What is a square then? A 2D cube? Come on, you can do better than that.

There are plenty of disk shaped animals, including hundreds of species of these:

Most lives aren't "disk shaped" because that is not the better shape for what they do.

Now go ahead and move your goalpost again.

 

[juvenissun]

A disk is a disk, not a 2D "sphere". What is a square then? A 2D cube? Come on, you can do better than that.

There are plenty of disk shaped animals, including hundreds of species of these:

Most lives aren't "disk shaped" because that is not the better shape for what they do.

Now go ahead and move your goalpost again.

I guess you do not know how to ask questions. Let me show you one more time: (you got to learn this!)

Why is there no disk-shape animal on land or in air but only in water?

 

[AECellini]

I guess you do not know how to ask questions. Let me show you one more time: (you got to learn this!)

Why is there no disk-shape animal on land or in air but only in water?

why would that be beneficial? that's like asking why no animals have wheels or why we don't have bunny ears.

 

[CabVet]

I guess you do not know how to ask questions. Let me show you one more time: (you got to learn this!)

Why is there no disk-shape animal on land or in air but only in water?

Oh, so you are the one asking the questions and I am the one that don't know how to ask. That is a new low. Here is your question (the one I answered) again in case you forgot:

But why aren't most lives disk in shape?

The answer is simple, there are not more "disk shapped" animals because it is not advantageous to be so. If you don't believe that, just trying flying your saucer through the forest.

 

[Loudmouth]

I guess you do not know how to ask questions. Let me show you one more time: (you got to learn this!)

Why is there no disk-shape animal on land or in air but only in water?

Dragging those goal posts all over the field must make you really tired.

First, you claimed there were no spherical species. When you were shown spherical species you then changed it to disk shaped. When you were shown disk shaped organisms you change dit to terrestrial disk shaped organisms.

Do you see a trend here?

 

[juvenissun]

Oh, so you are the one asking the questions and I am the one that don't know how to ask. That is a new low. Here is your question (the one I answered) again in case you forgot:



The answer is simple, there are not more "disk shapped" animals because it is not advantageous to be so. If you don't believe that, just trying flying your saucer through the forest.

I can imagine A LOT of advantages if there were a life which stays in the air and flies in the air like a saucer.

What about bacteria? Bacteria can certainly stay in the air for a very long time. Why don't they flourish in the air?

 

[juvenissun]

Dragging those goal posts all over the field must make you really tired.

First, you claimed there were no spherical species. When you were shown spherical species you then changed it to disk shaped. When you were shown disk shaped organisms you change dit to terrestrial disk shaped organisms.

Do you see a trend here?

Of course, the trend shows I can think better than you do.

 

[AECellini]

Of course, the trend shows I can think better than you do.

can't breathe from laughing so hard.

 

[Loudmouth]

Of course, the trend shows I can think better than you do.

It's been a while since my eyes have rolled that hard.

 

[Tiberius]

So, if the shape is spherical and can roll, then all the worries would disappear.

Except that there would be no front end to serve as the home for the sensory organs, would there?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Of course, the trend shows I can think better than you do.

There is a clear pattern of you continually trying to position yourself as being superior in various ways to the people you argue with here. You claim to be a teacher or you make bald statements, like the above, claiming to be better in some way. You make these statements repeatedly. Unfortunately your posts don't back up your claims at all, and actually show you to be singularly lacking in the very qualities you wish to give yourself. When the disconnect between your claims and your performance in the thread becomes farcical and impossible for you to continue, you profess boredom and move on to another thread where you repeat the process.

It might be helpful if you tried to address whatever it is that is causing you to do this.

 

[CabVet]

I can imagine A LOT of advantages if there were a life which stays in the air and flies in the air like a saucer.

What about bacteria? Bacteria can certainly stay in the air for a very long time. Why don't they flourish in the air?

Kinda hard to find food in a such a diluted environment as air, don't you think? You did know bacteria need nutrients, didn't you?

All man-made aircraft are disk-shapped since a saucer shape is sooooo good for flying. Oh wait...

 

[CabVet]

Of course, the trend shows I can think better than you do.

Oh so very humble of you...

 

[CabVet]

Except that there would be no front end to serve as the home for the sensory organs, would there?

Hey, I have a solution for that, just roll your eyes like Loudmouth!

It's been a while since my eyes have rolled that hard.

 

[juvenissun]

Except that there would be no front end to serve as the home for the sensory organs, would there?

Sense of direction could be controlled by the central nerve system. There is no need of directional mark on the external form.

 

[juvenissun]

Kinda hard to find food in a such a diluted environment as air, don't you think? You did know bacteria need nutrients, didn't you?

All man-made aircraft are disk-shapped since a saucer shape is sooooo good for flying. Oh wait...

Not necessary. When close to the ground, there is still plenty of food in the air.

 

[Gottservant]

Gah! When its good "Oh, that's because of an ancestor"... when its bad "Oh, that's because of a mutation"... when its neither good nor bad "Oh, that's because populations evolve not individuals"

You are describing nothing from multiple points of view and calling it established science, because it just so happens that looking for processes in a world of a changing ecology does actually save some time... as if "focusing" on its own wouldn't - when we already know that!!

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Gah! When its good "Oh, that's because of an ancestor"... when its bad "Oh, that's because of a mutation"... when its neither good nor bad "Oh, that's because populations evolve not individuals"

PROTIP: they're all the same thing

You are describing nothing from multiple points of view and calling it established science,

"Inherited from an ancestral species", "Caused by mutation", and "Evolution is what populations do", are descriptions of very real things.

because it just so happens that looking for processes in a world of a changing ecology does actually save some time... as if "focusing" on its own wouldn't - when we already know that!!

I have absolutely no idea what this means.

 

[Gottservant]

I have absolutely no idea what this means.

Lol, of course not, you only know how to make theory sound like its your own.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, if you can still apply yourself in some way.

Someone intelligent like you could probably have a crack at inventing power amplifiers (as opposed to just voltage) or something like that.

 

[Tiberius]

Sense of direction could be controlled by the central nerve system. There is no need of directional mark on the external form.

As soon as the organism tends to travel with one part of its body going first, then a front is established.