Hardware software random

Originally posted by vivify
Take a look at this famous example using a mousetrap that illustrates how evolution works. It shows each part of the mousetrap could've been used to catch a mouse, and getting more and complex over time. You can skip the lengthy introduction and just scroll down to the illustrations:

http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html

How long does it take for each piece *organ* of the mouse trap to become
what it is? If we speed up the process and say it only takes thousands of
years to get there then the only thing that useless new organ is doing until
then is drawing away useful energy from the life form causing it to be
weaker than it should be! It would be like adding a new gear to a watch that
has no need for it, it could and would only gum up the current pieces in
place.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Please, when the changes occur if they don't add to helping a life form
they add nothing...

And this is a problem for evolution, how exactly? It means you have a piece of genetic material that can be built on at some other, arbitrary time.

I will repeat from earlier posts, to make sure we're clear on this, that the vast majority of mutations are of this neutral kind. Not beneficial, nor detrimental.

Originally posted by C Hess
And this is a problem for evolution, how exactly? It means you have a piece of genetic material that can be built on at some other, arbitrary time.

I will repeat from earlier posts, to make sure we're clear on this, that the vast majority of mutations are of this neutral kind. Not beneficial, nor detrimental.

Life like any machine has energy requirements, there are needs within the
system that need blood or something else. What you are suggesting is that
evolution can add new parts that either don't function while they are being
built yet, but they must be maintained so that they can be useful when all
the other pieces of them come together. That robs what is currently there of
vital requirements, this would not make any living system better off, but
would make it weaker! Throwing a bunch of non-beneficial mutations
together to build something new would do just that, rob what is required
for something useless, on the whole it would be very detrimental.

That is assuming all the mutations all move towards the goal of building
something useful, when as I pointed out to you before, random can add
and it can subtract, nothing would be actually pushing towards any goal.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Life like any machine has energy requirements, there are needs within the
system that need blood or something else. What you are suggesting is that
evolution can add new parts that either don't function while they are being
built yet, but they must be maintained so that they can be useful when all
the other pieces of them come together. That robs what i ...[text shortened]... before, random can add
and it can subtract, nothing would be actually pushing towards any goal.

lets say we have a simple organism called - gary.

gary is the toughest organism in the street.
gary burns 100 globs of energy per day.
all the other organisms use 500 globs of energy.
one day gary mutates.
gary finds that he can now convert energy much more efficiently.
he now burns 15 globs of energy per day.
a few months later gary mutates again.
gary's new mutation does absolutely nothing.
garys new mutation costs gary an extra 5 globs of energy.
gary now burns 20 globs of energy per day.


gary is still the hardest, bad ass, glob burning organism in the street.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Throwing a bunch of non-beneficial mutations
together to build something new would do just that, rob what is required
for something useless, on the whole it would be very detrimental.

Not quite the same thing but look at the crap most of us carry about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality

http://io9.com/5829687/10-vestigial-traits-you-didnt-know-you-had

The big challenge for Creationists is to explain why we (and other animals) are so poorly designed.

Originally posted by stellspalfie

gary finds that he can now convert energy much more efficiently.

gary is suppose to be completely without any goal, any smarts, any intelligence, any know-how and and without any ability to evaluate what puts gary in an "advantageous" situation or what renders gary the advantage of operating "more efficiently".

Originally posted by sonship

gary finds that he can now convert energy much more efficiently.

gary is suppose to be completely without any goal, any smarts, any intelligence, any know-how and and without any ability to evaluate what puts gary in an "advantageous" situation or what renders gary the advantage of operating "more efficiently".

yep.

would you say elements on the periodic scale have intelligence or goals??? is it magnesium's goal to react with oxygen??? no, but we can see in chemistry that complex chemicals form and can do all kinds of amazing things.

the same applies to organisms, they have no goal. the organisms that do survive didnt plan to, they just did due to their organic structure.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
lets say we have a simple organism called - gary.

gary is the toughest organism in the street.
gary burns 100 globs of energy per day.
all the other organisms use 500 globs of energy.
one day gary mutates.
gary finds that he can now convert energy much more efficiently.
he now burns 15 globs of energy per day.
a few months later gary mutates a ...[text shortened]... of energy per day.


gary is still the hardest, bad ass, glob burning organism in the street.

You can make it up, evolution is full of things like gary, the reality of these
changes build on top of one another so you can move from a simple life
form to one much more complex isn't seen it is just believed. So now you'd
have me believe that not only will these mutations build a new organ to
allow some body part that isn't needed just yet can occur, in addition to that
for every major change even before that can happen other random
mutations have to occur so that they can support the useless body parts
till they are useful? You are not making it easier to believe but harder!

Originally posted by KellyJay
You can make it up, evolution is full of things like gary, the reality of these
changes build on top of one another so you can move from a simple life
form to one much more complex isn't seen it is just believed. So now you'd
have me believe that not only will these mutations build a new organ to
allow some body part that isn't needed just yet can occur ...[text shortened]... he useless body parts
till they are useful? You are not making it easier to believe but harder!

i can totally accept that you find it hard to imagine. but your ability to imagine is not a good way of measuring things. i find it hard to imagine the vastness of space, i find it hard to imagine how a particle can be in two places at once. i find it hard to imagine why people would want to believe in a christian god....but non of these things are reliant on the levels of my imagination.
the evidence all points to evolution, regardless what your imagination tells you. i have no love for evolution and natural selection, its a horrible, nasty system. i would be perfectly happy to wake up tomorrow and find out that there was a mountain of evidence pointing to something else other than evolution.......but there isnt.

i have to say though that i find it staggeringly arrogant that you would have more trust your imagination, which is no more than a hunch over the knowledge of experts

i cant imagine there are any other scientific theories that you would trust your own opinion over an experts. is there?

Originally posted by stellspalfie

yep.

would you say elements on the periodic scale have intelligence or goals??? is it magnesium's goal to react with oxygen??? no, but we can see in chemistry that complex chemicals form and can do all kinds of amazing things.

I would say that those elements and reactions are by the intelligent design of a planning mind with some goals.

This is apparently more evident upon the discovery of the finely tuned cosmos from the creation event to support life.

You see you are taking a process with allegedly no knowledge and continually having to speak of it as in fact intelligent.

the same applies to organisms, they have no goal. the organisms that do survive didnt plan to, they just did due to their organic structure.

Why then is survival so important to life all around in general ?
It is very difficult to imagine that the survival of living things and the reproduction of living things originates from a goalless and unintelligent cascade of "lucky" outcomes of the interaction of matter and energy.

Originally posted by sonship

yep.

would you say elements on the periodic scale have intelligence or goals??? is it magnesium's goal to react with oxygen??? no, but we can see in chemistry that complex chemicals form and can do all kinds of amazing things.

I would say that those elements and reactions are by the intelligent design of a planning mind with some goal ...[text shortened]... goalless and unintelligent cascade of "lucky" outcomes of the interaction of matter and energy.

whoaaahh there sonship, you are taking this off in a different direction. if you want to argue that an initial intelligence set all the plates spinning then thats another issue for another day.

regardless if god imbued the chemicals with their abilities or if it happened naturally the point remains. once these chemicals have their individual abilities its perfectly easy to see how more complex things can happen without a need for a constant intelligent guidance.

Originally posted by sonship

yep.

would you say elements on the periodic scale have intelligence or goals??? is it magnesium's goal to react with oxygen??? no, but we can see in chemistry that complex chemicals form and can do all kinds of amazing things.

I would say that those elements and reactions are by the intelligent design of a planning mind with some goal ...[text shortened]... goalless and unintelligent cascade of "lucky" outcomes of the interaction of matter and energy.

"You see you are taking a process with allegedly no knowledge and continually having to speak of it as in fact intelligent. "

i have not spoken as if it was intelligent. i have said the total opposite. there is no intelligence, just chemical reactions.

Originally posted by sonship

yep.

would you say elements on the periodic scale have intelligence or goals??? is it magnesium's goal to react with oxygen??? no, but we can see in chemistry that complex chemicals form and can do all kinds of amazing things.

I would say that those elements and reactions are by the intelligent design of a planning mind with some goal ...[text shortened]... goalless and unintelligent cascade of "lucky" outcomes of the interaction of matter and energy.

"Why then is survival so important to life all around in general ? "

it depends when you are talking about.

survival is not important to simple organisms. survival is a by-product of their chemical make up and environment.

survival for us is the result of millions of years of success, we are bred to survive, all our ancestors survived. you come from a direct line of 100% survivors not one single generation in millions of years has failed. thats an amazing achievement, well done.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
"Why then is [b]survival so important to life all around in general ? "

it depends when you are talking about.

survival is not important to simple organisms. survival is a by-product of their chemical make up and environment.

survival for us is the result of millions of years of success, we are bred to survive, all our ancestors survived. y ...[text shortened]... one single generation in millions of years has failed. thats an amazing achievement, well done.[/b]

Tell me if you can or use your imagination.

How many things do you think have to happen and work right for a one celled animal like an amoeba (for instance), to divide into two amoebas? Would you put it at several things?, a hundred things?, a thousand ?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i can totally accept that you find it hard to imagine. but your ability to imagine is not a good way of measuring things. i find it hard to imagine the vastness of space, i find it hard to imagine how a particle can be in two places at once. i find it hard to imagine why people would want to believe in a christian god....but non of these things are reli ...[text shortened]... e any other scientific theories that you would trust your own opinion over an experts. is there?

Oh no, I imagine the only way that process works is in someone's imagination.
Nothing about my complaints have rested in scripture.