Quote:Always found it curious the more conservative realms of Christianity have such a rough time understanding evolution
Well, it's hard. And these dumb fucks don't do "hard" very well.
The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
|
Quote:Always found it curious the more conservative realms of Christianity have such a rough time understanding evolution Well, it's hard. And these dumb fucks don't do "hard" very well. RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
May 9, 2017 at 2:46 pm
(This post was last modified: May 9, 2017 at 3:25 pm by Rhondazvous.)
(May 9, 2017 at 7:46 am)Khemikal Wrote: If I were a cretinist, I don't think I'd wonder much about the plausibility(?) of photoresponses evolutionary development.....I'd wonder more at the fact that photoresponse was literally baked in at a point well -before- biological evolution. The very first moment that the very first life arose, at least one of the means by which photoresponse is and was achieved already existed. Photoresponse predates cells..... That is so true. The potential for photoresponse goes at least as far back as the great oxygenation event. Consider how plants respond to the sun, following its course across the sky. Then consider the possible evolutionary connection between plants and animals at the time of the oxygenation event. It's all there. (May 9, 2017 at 10:14 am)Cyberman Wrote: That's just a regular Big Mac.This is why it's always so dark in McDees, to keep the hamburgers from evolving into something that stares back at us.
The god who allows children to be raped out of respect for the free will choice of the rapist, but punishes gay men for engaging in mutually consensual sex couldn't possibly be responsible for an intelligently designed universe.
I may defend your right to free speech, but i won't help you pass out flyers. Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire Nietzsche isn't dead. How do I know he lives? He lives in my mind.
I also love the "the scientists are just in it for the money" If scientists were out to enrich themselves then there are far easier and far more profitable ways to make money with far more job security
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.
Inuit Proverb RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
May 9, 2017 at 9:14 pm
(This post was last modified: May 9, 2017 at 9:15 pm by Cyberman.)
(May 9, 2017 at 2:46 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: This is why it's always so dark in McDees, to keep the hamburgers from evolving into something that stares back at us. "And when you gaze long into a happy meal the happy meal also gazes into you."
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
(May 9, 2017 at 9:14 pm)Cyberman Wrote: "And when you gaze long into a happy meal the happy meal also gazes into you." Quote the whole thing! To start with -- "Therefore, beware that when fighting Happy Meals, you do not yourself become a Happy Meal ..." RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
May 10, 2017 at 10:16 am
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2017 at 10:50 am by Rhondazvous.)
(May 9, 2017 at 3:31 pm)Orochi Wrote: I also love the "the scientists are just in it for the money" If scientists were out to enrich themselves then there are far easier and far more profitable ways to make money with far more job securityNever heard a scientist tell me I'd be weeded out by natural selection if I don't give him ten percent of my income. (May 9, 2017 at 9:14 pm)Cyberman Wrote:That's why it's happy. It's eye level with my boobs. New happy meal song, "This Joint is Jumpin'."(May 9, 2017 at 2:46 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: This is why it's always so dark in McDees, to keep the hamburgers from evolving into something that stares back at us.
The god who allows children to be raped out of respect for the free will choice of the rapist, but punishes gay men for engaging in mutually consensual sex couldn't possibly be responsible for an intelligently designed universe.
I may defend your right to free speech, but i won't help you pass out flyers. Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire Nietzsche isn't dead. How do I know he lives? He lives in my mind.
An eye is complex. A horse is slightly more so. We can trace the evolution of the horse.
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
May 11, 2017 at 3:28 pm
(This post was last modified: May 11, 2017 at 3:34 pm by John V.)
(May 8, 2017 at 6:15 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Organisms survive in their environment because they have what is necessary to do so. In an environment where there is not a lot of light, having eyes can actually be detrimental becase they use up metabolic resources the body could put to better use developing other senses needed in that environment. OK - organisms were apparently eating and reproducing before light sensitive cells, so what changed to make eyes evolve? (May 8, 2017 at 9:42 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Consider: Most animals having a neurosystem have nerves at the skin for heat detection. The odds are that that photosensitive cell would be linked to a nerve at one point or another. And given the complexity of even nonhuman brains, and their plasticity, I don't see that a scaffold has not already been built. This is the typical type of response to irreducible complexity, and it's not very satisfying. The tell is "given." Basically, given an organism that already has all but one piece of the system, adding one piece is plausible. Even so, in this case, you haven't solved the problem. A photosensitive cell feeding information to a brain that's interpreting the input as heat is getting faulty information, and the organism is at a disadvantage relative to its peers.
If evolution is real, then why haven't my eyes evolved to see through pretty girls' dresses? I'm sure that'd be an essential evolutionary trait.
(May 9, 2017 at 3:31 pm)Orochi Wrote: I also love the "the scientists are just in it for the money" If scientists were out to enrich themselves then there are far easier and far more profitable ways to make money with far more job security Yeah. Religion for example. Plenty of rich motherfuckers conning assholes out of their money every sunday. I'm sure A/M joyfully pays up so jesus keeps loving his ass. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|