Why does life look as if it evolved?

[Chalnoth]

Nonsense.
Concepts reused:
eye, stomach, hair, teeth, heart, blood, intestines, bone, and so on.

Ah, but they aren't reused. These things are only in common within the same line of descent. You never see, for example, an animal with both feathers and mammary glands.

 

[Loudmouth]

Nonsense.
Concepts reused:
eye, stomach, hair, teeth, heart, blood, intestines, bone, and so on.

Why don't we find an organism with a cephalopod eye and hair?

Why don't we find an organism with bicuspids and feathers?

Why don't we find an organism with compound eyes and bones?

It is the pattern of "reuse" which points to evolution and common ancestry. Designers are not limited to a nested hierarchy. In fact, a designer would be stupid to limit designs so that they fit a nested hierarchy. Evolution, in the absence of horizontal gene transfer, produces a nested hierarchy. We observe a nested hierarchy.

 

[Merlin]

Why don't we find an organism with a cephalopod eye and hair?

Why don't we find an organism with bicuspids and feathers?

Why don't we find an organism with compound eyes and bones?

It is the pattern of "reuse" which points to evolution and common ancestry. Designers are not limited to a nested hierarchy. In fact, a designer would be stupid to limit designs so that they fit a nested hierarchy. Evolution, in the absence of horizontal gene transfer, produces a nested hierarchy. We observe a nested hierarchy.

I would say this shows intellegent choices made.

 

[Chalnoth]

I would say this shows intellegent choices made.

They're not, though. There's no reason, intelligent or otherwise, for a designer not to reuse designs.

 

[Vene]

I would say this shows intellegent choices made.

But a cephalopod's eye is better than ours. They don't have a blind spot like we do. Since Jehovah already had a design that had better eyes than ours why would he give us eyes like other primates and mammals? Does he dislike our sight that much?

 

[Merlin]

But a cephalopod's eye is better than ours. They don't have a blind spot like we do. Since Jehovah already had a design that had better eyes than ours why would he give us eyes like other primates and mammals? Does he dislike our sight that much?

There are many traits I think is better.
But i'm not the designer.
I don't second guess Him.

 

[Merlin]

Neither concept is mandated from the evidence.
Design or evolution without devine intervention.

 

[peteos]

I think it is fairly clean Merlin does not understand what a nested hierarchy is (I am also an electrical engineer; and I certainly don't design anything in a nested hierarchy pattern). There are too many chefs in the kitchen here and we won't get anywhere until the concept of nested hierarchy is clear. Perhaps Loudmouth or some other well articulated poster should take the time to clearly demonstrate what is and what is not a nested hierarchy in design.

 

[Loudmouth]

I would say this shows intellegent choices made.

Care to clarify? Why does every vertebrate need a blind spot on their retina but cephalopods do not? Why do birds need feathers for insulation but not fur? Why do mammals have three middle ear bones but birds do not? If you give an animal feathers why can't you also give them mammary glands instead of having to upchuck dinner for the young'uns? It makes no sense except in the light of evolution.

One of my favorite car guys is Carol Shelby. He stuck an american motor in an english sportscar. Voila, the Cobra. Mixing and matching design components is intelligent. Limiting your choices for no good reason is not intelligent. Human designers are able to design organisms that violate the twin nested hierarchy, so why couldn't God?

 

[Loudmouth]

I think it is fairly clean Merlin does not understand what a nested hierarchy is (I am also an electrical engineer; and I certainly don't design anything in a nested hierarchy pattern). There are too many chefs in the kitchen here and we won't get anywhere until the concept of nested hierarchy is clear. Perhaps Loudmouth or some other well articulated poster should take the time to clearly demonstrate what is and what is not a nested hierarchy in design.

Since Merlin does not accept evolution there is no reason to explain it. I think it is much more instructive for creationists to explain why certain features are never found together for no apparent reason.

 

[Loudmouth]

Neither concept is mandated from the evidence.
Design or evolution without devine intervention.

Evolution, in the absence of horizontal gene transfer, can only produce one pattern: a nested hierarchy. That's it. A designer, on the other hand, can produce designs that do not fall into a nested hierarchy.

 

[Loudmouth]

There are many traits I think is better.
But i'm not the designer.
I don't second guess Him.

Did God think to himself, "Well, I gave this animal a backbone so I guess I have to put a blind spot in it's retina." How does that make sense?

 

[Chalnoth]

There are many traits I think is better.
But i'm not the designer.
I don't second guess Him.

It's not about second guessing "Him". It's about second guessing you and people like you. Design makes no sense whatsoever because humans could make better designs than we see in nature.

 

[Merlin]

It's not about second guessing "Him". It's about second guessing you and people like you. Design makes no sense whatsoever because humans could make better designs than we see in nature.

I'm sure you think that.
I disagree.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Horizontal gene transfer between Bacteria and Archaea (domains, the highest level meaningful taxa)?

I know I'm extremely anal And anyway, we know HGT is nothing supernatural. Just wanted to point out that your statement isn't entirely true.

Whoops, true! I meant organisms for which we don't observe HGT. IOW, in absense of any known natural mechanisms for transfer of genes, we shouldn't see things like glow in the dark animals, plants with animal DNA, etc. With the exception of convergent evolution as well I suppose, although at the genetic level it's pretty darned obvious if that happens.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

I would say this shows intellegent choices made.

Translation: If life was created, it still looks like it evolved.

 

[peteos]

Since Merlin does not accept evolution there is no reason to explain it. I think it is much more instructive for creationists to explain why certain features are never found together for no apparent reason.

We can't convince him that common descent is a reality if he doesn't even understand what the evidence is.

Merlin, might I suggest you read
http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/FEvolutionCase.htm
it discusses what a nested hierarchy is (gives pictures) and shows how it is created independently by fossils, morphology, biogeography, and most genetics, including non functional pseudogenes and even viral insertions. I'm afraid it is written by someone who is not a Christian and often makes a few negative remarks regarding our religion. It is only 12 pages long.

 

[Merlin]

I think it is fairly clean Merlin does not understand what a nested hierarchy is (I am also an electrical engineer; and I certainly don't design anything in a nested hierarchy pattern). There are too many chefs in the kitchen here and we won't get anywhere until the concept of nested hierarchy is clear. Perhaps Loudmouth or some other well articulated poster should take the time to clearly demonstrate what is and what is not a nested hierarchy in design.

I made it clear I was referring to the posted example that I was replying to at the time.

 

[Merlin]

We can't convince him that common descent is a reality if he doesn't even understand what the evidence is.

her/She.
Can 't you (at least) get that right
Please

 

[peteos]

her/She.
Can 't you (at least) get that right
Please

WHOOOPS! Sorry about that.

I encourage you to read the article I posted above.