Originally posted by wolfgang59I just watched your link, outstanding stuff. Sort of proves my point too don't you
[b]"None of those actually has anything ‘seeing’ or understanding what is affecting it is light either! So getting something light sensitive isn’t useful unless that translates into some useful information of sorts."
But we learn to interpret the input from our eyes! babies cannot 'see' as we do and I remember a TV story about a man blind fr ...[text shortened]... as much or more so than the eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKd56D2mvN0[/b]
think? There is a lot too this, it isn't as simple as people seem to want to suggest.
Kelly
6 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayAt last I think I finally sussed out what you are actually saying and I can see that you are in error:
Babies have fully developed eyes, everything is connected properly, all the
systems are in place working together.
We are not talking about that! What we are talking about is something completely
different! The movie you are referring too I believe is called, "At first sight" and
he was not born blind, he became blind early in life and got his eyes fi , never bothering to look at the details, they have what they want
so that is enough.
Kelly
What you are saying is that there is a chicken and egg problem:
“…What is sort of being ‘assumed’ when people say a light sensitive spot just
occurred is that with it comes the ability to send and receive information to make
that new spot an advantage….”
Not necessarily ( for reasons I will explain )
“…This supposedly automatically happens the same time
the spot arrives that communication just magically works itself out….”
No, that is generally NOT how evolution works.
Evolution generally ( but not necessarily or always ) produces one advantageous change at a time.
Although it must be mathematically possible for more than one advantageous mutation to occur in the same individual at the same time, this probably rarely happens.
There is no way to tell exactly the order of events of how it DID actually happen because there are at least two ways it could have happened: Either the light-absorbing pigment came first or the “communication system” ( if we may call it this) came first ( but probably the two things didn’t came at the same time although this is still theoretically possible! )
So ONE plausible way it could have happened is first a light-absorbing pigment formed without any communication system and there are various ways this could have given a living thing an immediate survival advantage without any kind of “communication system”.
-for example, it could have simply gave the advantage of absorbing the suns heat in a coldish climate where that extra heat-absorption would warm it and thus give it an obvious competitive advantage –then natural selection takes over. There are numerous living examples of just such organisms that live today including almost all-black ladybirds that live in Scotland: being animals they have a “communication system” but that is irrelevant here because that system is not connected to the black pigment on there shells!
There are also examples of fungi that evolved to have black pigment to absorb the sun’s heat in cold climates.
Then only LATER on did the “communication system” evolve so that the function of that pigment could be changed from mere solar-heat absorber to sensing light. There are numerous living examples of organisms with something evolved to change its function that live today including bird-wings that evolved from front-legs for walking etc.
So no chicken and egg problem: the pigment could have come first 🙂
(although it might have happened the other way around)
6 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay“to get useful information across” to where? ( in a single-celled living thing it doesn’t have to go far!)
Look at the effort required to get useful information across.
Kelly
And, what kind of “useful” information? ( are we still just talking about visual brightness info?)
[off topic] my spell-checker just will not accept “And, what kind of “useful” information?” and I am totally mystified as to why! [/off topic]
And why cannot all the components of the process evolve one at a time by one mutation at a time with each mutation giving an immediate survival advantage over the previous stage?
Having asked all that, all my questions here are rather academic anyway because, if you read my previous post, you will see that I have basically shown the flaw in what you have been saying:
There is no chicken and egg problem: the pigment for what would eventually became the eye could have come first BEFORE any kind of communication system
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton“to get useful information across” to where? ( in a single-celled living thing it doesn’t have to go far!)"
“to get useful information across” to where? ( in a single-celled living thing it doesn’t have to go far!)
And, what kind of “useful” information? ( are we still just talking about visual brightness info?)
[off topic] my spell-checker just will not accept “And, what kind of “useful” information?” and I am totally mystified as to why! [/off topic ...[text shortened]... at would eventually became the eye could have come first BEFORE any kind of communication system
Where do you see me talking about distances within the single celled life form?
I've been talking about information, sensitivity, and resources! Even within
single celled life there are form and functions that separate one single celled
life form from another. There is no such thing as "...just talking about visual
brightness info..." As I pointed out having sensitivity to anything does not
make that sensitivity a good thing; an allergy could be due to sensitivity.
You guys want to make tremendously huge leap that a mutation within DNA occurs
that produces a spot sensitive to light that not only is sensitive in a good way, but
also produces information it gathers from this spot translating it so that it can be
beneficial to the cell. All of this is supposed to take place by mutations within DNA
that has no guiding force directing it to make sure all the dots are connected properly
so that everything works together and even with more time improves.
Kelly
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton"And why cannot all the components of the process evolve one at a time by one mutation at a time with each mutation giving an immediate survival advantage over the previous stage? "
“to get useful information across” to where? ( in a single-celled living thing it doesn’t have to go far!)
And, what kind of “useful” information? ( are we still just talking about visual brightness info?)
[off topic] my spell-checker just will not accept “And, what kind of “useful” information?” and I am totally mystified as to why! [/off topic ...[text shortened]... at would eventually became the eye could have come first BEFORE any kind of communication system
Well, lets see your this happend, then that happened, then we have an eye! What
do you think happened? List your one at a time mutation along with the both
reasons why it would give an immediate survival advantage each step of the way.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton"There is no way to tell exactly the order of events of how it DID actually happen because there are at least two ways it could have happened: Either the light-absorbing pigment came first or the “communication system” ( if we may call it this) came first ( but probably the two things didn’t came at the same time although this is still theoretically possible! ) "
At last I think I finally sussed out what you are actually saying and I can see that you are in error:
What you are saying is that there is a chicken and egg problem:
[b]“…What is sort of being ‘assumed’ when people say a light sensitive spot just
occurred is that with it comes the ability to send and receive information to make
that new spot a ...[text shortened]... em: the pigment could have come first 🙂
(although it might have happened the other way around)
[/b]Or, none of the above...you assume it did therefore you'll jump to whatever
sounds good, not that there is any reason to pick one way over another.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayThere is just so much wrong with that one statement! :
"There is no way to tell exactly the order of events of how it DID actually happen because there are at least two ways it could have happened: Either the light-absorbing pigment came first or the “communication system” ( if we may call it this) came first ( but probably the two things didn’t came at the same time although this is still theoretically possibl p to whatever
sounds good, not that there is any reason to pick one way over another.
Kelly
“…Or, none of the above…”
So you are saying that X didn’t come before Y and Y didn’t come before X and X and Y didn’t come at the same time? ( note that I suggested all three possibilities albeit saying the last one is, although possible, very unlikely )
Well, if none of those three then how? –I mean, what is the fourth possibility are you suggesting here?
We agree that X and Y exist in living things in the present day so, logically, whether you are a creationist or an atheist or whatever you are, surely you can see either one came before the other or they came at the same time?
“….you assume it did…”
“assume”? –it isn’t an assumption. LOGIC dictates that there are only three possibilities –so, no “assuming” anything! –I “know” it. To say that I “assume” this is a bit like saying I “assume” that either p OR NOT p must be true –I don’t “assume” it, I “know” it.
“…therefore you'll jump to whatever sounds good…”
Nope; just the one that I think is most probable.
“…not that there is any reason to pick one way over another….”
Nope; I just gave a reason why one is significantly less likely than the other two for evolution wouldn’t normally create two advantageous mutations at the same time. I chose the one out of the remaining two on the bases that there are examples of life forms that don’t respond to light even though they have pigmentation because that pigmentation has some other function. So, purely on the bases of that observation, I am guessing it is slightly more likely that that the pigment came first. But this is just a guess and it could have easily happened the other way around –no problem either way.
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay“…lets see your this happened…”
"And why cannot all the components of the process evolve one at a time by one mutation at a time with each mutation giving an immediate survival advantage over the previous stage? "
Well, lets see your this happend, then that happened, then we have an eye! What
do you think happened? List your one at a time mutation along with the both
reasons why it would give an immediate survival advantage each step of the way.
Kelly
I don’t know what you mean by the above.
“…What
do you think happened?...”
I have already told you.
“…List your one at a time mutation along…”
I have already told you that the order of events that must have happened must have been just one of numerous different ways it could have happened.
I have also already told you that ONE possible first mutation could have been a mutation to produce a pigment to absorb the suns heat and thus warming the life-form but WITHOUT that pigment being connected to any “communication system” -ok, I don’t want to go to all the time and effort to make a “list” for you to then just trash it. So let’s just start with that first mutation that I have just suggested; any problems with that first mutation that gives immediate survival advantage?
Originally posted by KellyJayYour answers can be met here -
"And why cannot all the components of the process evolve one at a time by one mutation at a time with each mutation giving an immediate survival advantage over the previous stage? "
Well, lets see your this happend, then that happened, then we have an eye! What
do you think happened? List your one at a time mutation along with the both
reasons why it would give an immediate survival advantage each step of the way.
Kelly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyespot_apparatus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_protein
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYour assuming that evolution is the cause and the flow of how the eye got here
There is just so much wrong with that one statement! :
“…Or, none of the above…”
So you are saying that X didn’t come before Y and Y didn’t come before X and X and Y didn’t come at the same time? ( note that I suggested all three possibilities albeit saying the last one is, although possible, very unlikely )
Well, if none of those three th ...[text shortened]... is just a guess and it could have easily happened the other way around –no problem either way.
was a steady flow of small changes.
Kelly
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonSo you don't know how it happened, you don't know any of the details, you just
“…lets see your this happened…”
I don’t know what you mean by the above.
“…What
do you think happened?...”
I have already told you.
“…List your one at a time mutation along…”
I have already told you that the order of events that must have happened must have been just one of numerous different ways it could have happened.
I have al ...[text shortened]... e just suggested; any problems with that first mutation that gives immediate survival advantage?
know it did.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobI've read some of them already, but I'll make sure I read them all.
Your answers can be met here -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyespot_apparatus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_protein
As near as I can tell none of the concerns I have over eyes are addressed, they
just make bold statements like some have done here.
Kelly