(February 11, 2020 at 6:54 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote:

(February 11, 2020 at 9:06 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Yeah, were there first horses with only one leg and then they evolved other three?

But kidding aside, that's called Bilateral symmetry. 99% of organisms are bilaterally symmetric

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_in_biology

So Bilateral symmetry ensures the eyes are spaced apart just perfectly, my!

“said mutations are 100% random”
False ”

Nope, you are false, mutations are 100% random. This is your crutch to lie about this.
NS can do absolutely nothing in the way of developing new traits because mutations are what causes new traits to emerge.
Your repeated lies to this not helping your cause

Bilateral symmetry doesn't ensure equal spacing, but it makes it much more likely because a mutation in one gene can affect both sides of an organism with bilateral symmetry (which is most animals visible to the naked eye).

Mutations aren't magic. They are constrained by the laws of biochemistry, and therefore CANNOT be 100% random. Like most random events, they are constrained by their 'possibility space'. Like a die with 100 sides could only give '100% random results' as long as those results aren't lower than 1 or higher than 100. It's not going to give a random result of 'sky' unless 'sky' is printed on one of the sides.

Natural selection is primarily a conservative 'force', it eliminates what is detrimental to an organism reproducing, so most of the time it's acting to keep a species the way it already is. Without natural selection species would become unrecognizable as variations with adverse survival value would be retained in the species instead of eliminated. Mutations happen on the individual level, a novel trait cannot emerge at the species level unless it is not selected against by natural selection. Mutations supply individual variations, natural selection (or possibly a population bottleneck like the founder effect) determines whether a new genetic variation spreads to the species level.

Big words frighten tater tot.

(February 11, 2020 at 6:54 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote: So Bilateral symmetry ensures the eyes are spaced apart just perfectly, my!

“said mutations are 100% random”
False ”

Nope, you are false, mutations are 100% random. This is your crutch to lie about this.
NS can do absolutely nothing in the way of developing new traits because mutations are what causes new traits to emerge.
Your repeated lies to this not helping your cause

Evolution as a whole works both ways, it's not all about the positive effects as some changes can be for the WORSE for a species of animal. It's those that live longer that have more chance of passing on their genetic material, those those with more beneficial mutations live longer and have more offspring, and so on and so forth.

With Eye's in particular there would be a case of some mutations not placing the eyes far enough apart/one eye/eyes too far apart/eyes in different locations etc [of course changing over the courses of billions of years] where those that were at a disadvantage either died or simply could not reproduce as well as the others who's eyes were evolutionary more beneficial to the continue'd line of whatever animal it relates too.

There is a really good video on the evolution of the eye in particular from the Cosmos Tv show:

There is also the small factor of mutations that are beneficial in one environment can be neutral or detrimental in other environments.

(February 12, 2020 at 1:32 pm)Mr Greene Wrote: There is also the small factor of mutations that are beneficial in one environment can be neutral or detrimental in other environments.

Like the moths in England that turned darker when their trees had heavy layers of soot and light again when the air cleared after the mills(?) were shut down.

At work.

(February 12, 2020 at 4:01 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(February 12, 2020 at 1:32 pm)Mr Greene Wrote: There is also the small factor of mutations that are beneficial in one environment can be neutral or detrimental in other environments.

Like the moths in England that turned darker when their trees had heavy layers of soot and light again when the air cleared after the mills(?) were shut down.

Posting first:

"BUT THEY WERE STILL MOTHS."

(February 12, 2020 at 11:01 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(February 11, 2020 at 6:54 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote: So Bilateral symmetry ensures the eyes are spaced apart just perfectly, my!

“said mutations are 100% random”
False ”

Nope, you are false, mutations are 100% random. This is your crutch to lie about this.
NS can do absolutely nothing in the way of developing new traits because mutations are what causes new traits to emerge.
Your repeated lies to this not helping your cause

Bilateral symmetry doesn't ensure equal spacing, but it makes it much more likely because a mutation in one gene can affect both sides of an organism with bilateral symmetry (which is most animals visible to the naked eye).

There is also a problem with YJ's use of the term perfect. None of it is "perfect" symmetry. That is a strawman.

Read once that people in the Americas are having a detrimental hand in rattlesnake selection. When a snake rattles, the natural impulse is to kill it. Since not all species or individuals within a species rattle at the same rate, humans are inadvertently selecting for snakes that don’t rattle, which will eventually lead to more people being bitten.

Evolution is SO cool. 

Boru

(February 12, 2020 at 4:01 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(February 12, 2020 at 1:32 pm)Mr Greene Wrote: There is also the small factor of mutations that are beneficial in one environment can be neutral or detrimental in other environments.

Like the moths in England that turned darker when their trees had heavy  layers of soot and light again when the air cleared after the mills(?) were shut down.

Also eyes whilst beneficial in most environments are detrimental in permanently dark conditions with low nutrition due to the energy expended in growing them. Thus animals living in caves are under significant selection pressure to lose their eyes.

(February 12, 2020 at 6:34 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:

(February 12, 2020 at 11:01 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: Bilateral symmetry doesn't ensure equal spacing, but it makes it much more likely because a mutation in one gene can affect both sides of an organism with bilateral symmetry (which is most animals visible to the naked eye).

There is also a problem with YJ's use of the term perfect. None of it is "perfect" symmetry. That is a strawman.

I come up against the concept of perfect symmetry every time I get new glasses.  My eyes are pretty well lined up but apparently my ears aren't quite level.  Drives opticians crazy.