Originally posted by FreakyKBHEnvironment knows nothing about anything... nor it needs to know. There is no intention or purpose.
In the second scenario, how is that the environment knows what is best for a particular species' survival, or what species are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
Do you think everything has a purpose? Things simply happen.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI swear your doing this on purpose, and don't actually want to understand. Again your assigning human traits and values to a non sentient subject.
I'll respond to both yours and amannion's posts as they talk about the same thing.
Manipulating genetic traits is an action (breeding cows, for instance) with a target (more meat/less fat) in the mind of the selector (said rancher).
According to amannion, natural selection is when the environment takes over. This is where the formula starts to get a ...[text shortened]... are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
"knows whats best""best for continued survival" etc. The environment doesn't know. Last time I'm trying this....... I'll use the cows because you seem to understand selective breeding.
A creatures genetics give it and advantage in its environment (more meat/less fat), It has preferential breeding rights because it has the advantage over its peers, It breeds, passing on those genes, the advantage it has becomes common place..... So those without said advantage are less able to mate/source food etc. Eventually the advantage becomes normal and the disadvantaged die out due to competition. Repeat with New Advantage...... Natural Selection
4 edits
Originally posted by serigadoA night or so ago I saw a beautiful detailed college level presentation of the biological process of Protein Synthesis.
Environment knows nothing about anything... nor it needs to know. There is no intention or purpose.
Do you think everything has a purpose? Things simply happen.
I surely cannot believe that it just happens given enough time - it simply happens.
If I can believe that Protein Synthesis just happens given long enough time then I'd have to believe the Internet with all of its networking, servers, applets, servlets, ports, operating systems and Java programs and browsers could just come together given enough time.
That be like saying, given enough time, the wind swept planet of Mars would eventually whip up a Martian global Internel system. Just let the wind whip around and fluids flow and sands shift and rocks roll and dust storms blow for hundreds of billion years - the Martian Internet Super Highway would just happen.
I don't have that much faith.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBut there you miss the fundamental genius of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace. They realized that what was going on in the barnyards of men was ALSO happening in nature. The same process that gave rise to Holstein cows -- with the forces of nature substituted for the forces of man -- gave rise to birds of paradise and Galapagos finches.
I'll respond to both yours and amannion's posts as they talk about the same thing.
Manipulating genetic traits is an action (breeding cows, for instance) with a target (more meat/less fat) in the mind of the selector (said rancher).
According to amannion, natural selection is when the environment takes over. This is where the formula starts to get a ...[text shortened]... are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
Man applies force by restricting which farm animals breed. The forces of nature come from predation and competition for scarce resources.
Apply a force -- no matter which, no matter the goal or lack thereof -- and selection results.
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHpith taking 😀
That's a quaint attack. Did you have an argument or refutation, or are you content to dispense pithy nothings?
edit:
In the second scenario, how is that the environment knows what is best for a particular species' survival, or what species are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
that's because the environment is very very smart, and knows everything the little animals need, and guides the grass to the animal that it wants to do best etc etc...
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillYou really don't understand a thing, and you're mixing a lot of different stuff, trying to use the same argument for all.
A night or so ago I saw a beautiful detailed college level presentation of the biological process of [b] Protein Synthesis.
I surely cannot believe that it just happens given enough time - it simply happens.
If I can believe that Protein Synthesis just happens given long enough time then I'd have to believe the Internet with all of its networki ...[text shortened]... rs - the Martian Internet Super Highway would just happen.
I don't have that much faith.[/b]
Result: you make yourself look pretty ignorant.
The resume is: you can't understand all the complexity, so you assume there must have been a creator or intelligent design. Now that's a good explanation... Christianity as figured it all out, and it's been there for centuries! Why does science try to bother to understand it?
It's possible to form proteins from 0. It's possible to form more complex protein from less complex ones. It happens, there's no faith whatsoever. Faith does not exist in the scientific explanation for the origin of life.
But why do I bother... You don't seem to have the mental ability to understand complex systems. Just leave the explanations you don't have the ability to understand to your pesky little god.
Originally posted by jaywillActually the internet started out as something really really really really simple and turned into the ridiculously complex system that it is today... So in a way it did exactly what you said you can't believe it would do.
A night or so ago I saw a beautiful detailed college level presentation of the biological process of [b] Protein Synthesis.
I surely cannot believe that it just happens given enough time - it simply happens.
If I can believe that Protein Synthesis just happens given long enough time then I'd have to believe the Internet with all of its networki ...[text shortened]... rs - the Martian Internet Super Highway would just happen.
I don't have that much faith.[/b]
Personally I know little of Protein Synthesis, so I can't speak of it. But I'm sure there are documented forms of that system which we're simpler and less efficient. Please correct me if there are not and I'll go do some reading.
Incredulity appears to be your only argument here. With respect to Natural Selection in particular its been proven to happen, there is no debate over it happening or not. Which is why Freaky has had so many responses to him. Its a proven scientific theory, not something which may or may not happen. Which is also why this got moved to spirituality.
As to mars, if mars had life and the driving forces for environmental change such as and seasons, plate tectonics and all the catalysts. Then there is no reason why they wouldn't develop to a similar level to us..... Simple really.....
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe environment knows nothing since the environment doesn't 'know' at all.
I'll respond to both yours and amannion's posts as they talk about the same thing.
Manipulating genetic traits is an action (breeding cows, for instance) with a target (more meat/less fat) in the mind of the selector (said rancher).
According to amannion, natural selection is when the environment takes over. This is where the formula starts to get a ...[text shortened]... are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
If I live in an environment full of nasty killing things that chase me, I need to be able to run away from them. If my brother can run faster than me, courtesy of slight variations in our genes, he survives and I don't.
A selection has been made.
I've been selected out, he's been selected for.
So who made the selection?
No one and no thing. It was just a natural process. I didn't make it, he did. What determined this? The environment, since it had these nasty killing things in the first place.
Where's the difficulty in this?
Originally posted by jaywillHere there's a key difference between protein synthesis (or any life process) and the internet.
A night or so ago I saw a beautiful detailed college level presentation of the biological process of [b] Protein Synthesis.
I surely cannot believe that it just happens given enough time - it simply happens.
If I can believe that Protein Synthesis just happens given long enough time then I'd have to believe the Internet with all of its networki ...[text shortened]... rs - the Martian Internet Super Highway would just happen.
I don't have that much faith.[/b]
The internet was designed with an intention beforehand. That is, people decided what they wanted and then went out and built it.
Protein synthesis and all other living processes were not designed beforehand (notwithstanding your view). So, all of these processes are simply life using pre-existing structures and frameworks to do new things or old things better.
An example of this in action is the co-option of gill structures in fish to eventually form the membrane and bone structure of the ear of mammals.
The mammalian ear wasn't designed beforehand (as with the internet). It simply developed from pre-existing structures that were doing other tasks.
In fact, truth be told, if someone were designing a living thing, it's possible to see many ways of doing something much better than we have.
Internet like structures aren't original to men. Nature seems to self-organize using networks similar to the internet. The same properties of robustness (killing some important servers doesn't kill the internet) are common in protein-protein synthesis and gene regulatory networks.
R. Albert, A.-L. Barabási (2002) Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics 74, 47-97
Yes, nature did self organize in structures that look like the internet.
"No, IT WAS GOD", some will shout...
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillUmm...proteins spontaneously assemble. All you need are the building blocks (nucleic acid triphosphates). You don't need organisms for THAT!
A night or so ago I saw a beautiful detailed college level presentation of the biological process of [b] Protein Synthesis.
I surely cannot believe that it just happens given enough time - it simply happens.
If I can believe that Protein Synthesis just happens given long enough time then I'd have to believe the Internet with all of its networki ...[text shortened]... rs - the Martian Internet Super Highway would just happen.
I don't have that much faith.[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhy do you persist in anthropomorphizing nature? Are you THAT narcissistic? You seem to be unable to get past a "Way of the Master"-ian "design needs a designer" non-sequitur.
In the second scenario, how is that the environment knows what is best for a particular species' survival, or what species are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
Are you thinking of dropping the Jesus shtick and becoming a deist, or what?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAs pointed out by a number of posters: It doesn't.
In the second scenario, how is that the environment knows what is best for a particular species' survival, or what species are best for continued survival? How does the environment know anything of the big picture?
Now that you know that please tell us:
1. Do you now understand the definition of Natural Selection?
2. Are you disputing that it takes place?
3. If Yes to 1. and No to 2. then what is your actual dispute?
2 edits
Originally posted by serigado====================================
You really don't understand a thing, and you're mixing a lot of different stuff, trying to use the same argument for all.
Result: you make yourself look pretty ignorant.
The resume is: you can't understand all the complexity, so you assume there must have been a creator or intelligent design. Now that's a good explanation... Christianity as figured it a ve the explanations you don't have the ability to understand to your pesky little god.
You really don't understand a thing, and you're mixing a lot of different stuff, trying to use the same argument for all.
Result: you make yourself look pretty ignorant.
========================================
For some reason I am not concerned with how ignorant I look to your opinion.
I am pretty sure that sexual reproduction, the functioning cell, the seeing eyeball, the thinking brain, the digesting digestive system, the breathing respritory system, the immune system, protein synthesis, cell division, blood clotting, required Intelligent Design.
Now while I look ignorant to you. You look like some kind of mad fool to me to assume that no intelligent "know-how" is behind the proper functioning of these biological phenomenon.
Now you can say "It only looks like a design." And you can say it is a pseudo Buddhist illusion which really is not a design at all. But it is you who appear ignorant to me.
I know that sounds insulting. But you started it. Okay? You appear to me to be a mad man. You're so intent on keeping your neat little godless creation that you can't see the obvious right in front of your proud arrogant face.
Stuff like this requires KNOW HOW. Energy and matter do not arrange themselves to do things like these without know how.
Like M. Behe put it - my decision to adopt an intelligent design view of these things does not come because of what I don't know, but because of what I do know.
=================================
The resume is: you can't understand all the complexity, so you assume there must have been a creator or intelligent design.
==================================
Stop right there. It is not only the complexity that is the issue. Irreducible complexity is not a matter of complexity alone. It is that the whole of the apparatus does not function if part of it is taken away. This makes gradualism difficult to account for the survival of some species.
In the intervening millions upon millions of years beteen a dinosour and a bird you had something which was not quite scales and something that was not quite yet feathers. And issue is that how could such an animal survive million with years with a part of its body which was not exactly scales and not exactly feathers, but was something in-between.
I am not afraid of complexity per se. But the function of many systems reveal that some as complexity mounts there seems to be forethought to the functioing end result.
You want me to believe that nature stumbled around improvising itself by trial and error with a kind of "We'll deal with that problem when the time comes" directionless, goaless natural selection.
How far are you going to take natural selection? Black moths on black smoky trees surviving white moths on black smoky trees is one thing. Going from ape's brain to a human being's brain is another.
You may have adapting fruit flies to point to as proof of macro evolution. But they were fruit flies before and after adaption. So it is not enough to prove macro evolution. You're only recourse seems to be the time will not allow us to see Species N become Species N+1.
So then we can't observe macro evolution and we can't repeat it. We can only imagine that it took placed based on some often dubious interpretations of fossil remains.
================================
Now that's a good explanation... Christianity as figured it all out, and it's been there for centuries! Why does science try to bother to understand it?
=================================
You're full of crap.
No body is telling scientist not to study as much as they can as much as they desire.
I like science just as much as the next guy. Excuse me if I don't swallow hook, line, and sinker every theory you come up with.
I want a second opinion on apes gradually becomming people. I want a second opinion on goaless natural selection producing randomly protein synthesis and cell division.
If it offends your religion I'm sorry. But you state that you know these things to be proven facts when you don't really know that.
==========================
It's possible to form proteins from 0. It's possible to form more complex protein from less complex ones. It happens, there's no faith whatsoever. Faith does not exist in the scientific explanation for the origin of life.
==============================
No one said ANYTHING about faith being responsible for it.
I am saying Intellegent Design is somewhere behind these things working this way.
You're full of crap.
And the rest of your post is equally full of crap. Go back to sleep! Or go say five "Hail Darwins" or something religious.
Originally posted by jaywillAre you able to give a more accurate description of what matter is or is not capable of doing without 'know how'?
Stuff like this requires KNOW HOW. Energy and matter do not arrange themselves to do things like these without know how.
For example, the rings of Saturn? Do they indicate intelligent design or did matter arrange itself in a pretty pattern all by itself? What about snow flakes?
Have you ever come across a computer program called the Game of Life by John Conway? From a random configuration and a simple rule based system, it produces some remarkable structures, including moving and self-replicating structures.