There is no such thing.
It's a nonsense question - if a motorbike could write poetry, would it write ballads or heroic verse?so what? its a theoretical question. we can ask what if we will have a self replicating car. can such a car evolve a gps?
If you want to discuss problems you see with the evolution of particular features of living things, by all means do so....even without this analogy we can ask about real designer like human. human c an change anything he want like mutations. right? so do you think that human can make a gps stepwise when every step is functional?
I don't think you've understood the video. If you watch it carefully and read (and try to understand) the explanations of what's going on, you ought to be able to follow it. It's not difficult.actually they prove id since their starting point (pendulum) contain at least 3 parts. so even their first step is impossible.
Your example is truthful in how some envision developments in evolution.so what? its a theoretical question. we can ask what if we will have a self replicating car. can such a car evolve a gps? if it can then why it will be possible in living things too?
even without this analogy we can ask about real designer like human. human c an change anything he want like mutations. right? so do you think that human can make a gps stepwise when every step is functional?
Yes, evolution is non-sense.It's a nonsense ............ The eye, bacterial flagellum, feathers, and wings all have been shown to have plausible evolutionary pathways. If there's something else that troubles you, just say.
"Envision" being the important word. They don't understand, they envision. And they're wrong.Your example is truthful in how some envision developments in evolution.
The eye, bacterial flagellum, feathers, and wings all have been shown to have plausible evolutionary pathways. If there's something else that troubles you, just say.
Requiring several parts for its function does not mean it's irreducibly complex, or that it can't evolve stepwise. The examples previously mentioned, and many others, demonstrate that.where to start? here is one example. the olfactory system need at least several parts for its minimal function. therefore it cant evolve stepwise.:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure...-odorant-receptors-are-localized-on-olfactory
We seem to see reoccurring conjecture based claims in what is presented.Requiring several parts for its function does not mean it's irreducibly complex, or that it can't evolve stepwise. ............ Olfaction is of ancient origin, and its evolution well documented. Wikipedia gives a decent overview, but there's plenty more online.
They did. When they evolve naturally, we call them horses.Things as chemically-systematically-neurologically complex as olfactory systems do not even come close in complexity to carburetor to fuel injection development.
So why didn't cars independently evolve such (rather than rely on the itelligence of man)?
The ability to reproduce with accumulated variation.What magic does biochemistry have?
So why didn't cars independently evolve such (rather than rely on the itelligence of man)?
not realy. a minimal olfactory system require at least 2-3 parts: a smell receptor, a connection to the nervous system and a system that can interpret it for the creature. so its irreducibly complex just from the start.Requiring several parts for its function does not mean it's irreducibly complex, or that it can't evolve stepwise. The examples previously mentioned, and many others, demonstrate that.
Olfaction is of ancient origin, and its evolution well documented. Wikipedia gives a decent overview, but there's plenty more online.
not realy. a minimal olfactory system require at least 2-3 parts: a smell receptor, a connection to the nervous system and a system that can interpret it for the creature. so its irreducibly complex just from the start.
Many have faith in the exalted evolution. You do know that, don't you. That is the domain of my academic expertise.Sometimes I despair of mankind reading these forums.
What you present is acceptance by belief. All through setting aside Creator to center only on natural processes.Sometimes I despair of mankind reading these forums.
The correlations from mineral processes to biochemical processes has been magnified by godless scientists.They did. When they evolve naturally, we call them horses.
The ability to reproduce with accumulated variation.