Posts: 67318
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 8, 2019 at 11:46 pm
Meh 0/10 for a lack of effort.
You let the paste eaters beat you, John. Not just beat you, embarrass you. Couldn’t even make it to a hundo.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 8, 2019 at 11:53 pm
(August 8, 2019 at 11:39 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Thread Conclusion:
Even though the purpose of this thread was just for me to test the waters and learn the format of this site, I hope the exchange illustrated that there is more to the evolution of vision than eyes. Along the way we touched on topics such as the explanatory role of theories and how testable hypotheses are deduced from them. I submit this thread as my introduction.
A few members are under the impression that evolution helps bind together every field pertaining to biological organisms. As such, next week I'll talk about why it fails at properly explaining animal behavior and cognition. A few members are knowledgeable in psychology an neuroscience, so it should be a worthwhile discussion. I look forward to that thread.
In the meantime, I hope everybody has nice weekend.
~J6B
The proselytizer is usually not capable of being moved to embarrassment by the idiocy of his own disingenuous ramblings, and always think more highly of himself in direct proportion to magnitude of the idiocy of his ramblings.
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 4:52 am
(August 8, 2019 at 4:52 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 8, 2019 at 4:32 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Any description of a process capable of creating life’s endless forms most beautiful, would, by necessity, be as flexible as what it described.
Don’t you think?
Yup, I agree. In fact, its almost poetic. That a theory which views nature as able to produce countless variations to an organism until a successful version emerges; itself survives by making endless predictions in hopes that a successful one emerges.
No that's not how evolution works. It implies a goal where there is none.
Its not just the environment sex and chance also have an impact. Its why some things actually hamper getting food but are, accentuated like the peacocks tail. Lady Peacocks like a nice big one.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 6:12 am
(August 8, 2019 at 11:39 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Thread Conclusion:
Even though the purpose of this thread was just for me to test the waters and learn the format of this site, I hope the exchange illustrated that there is more to the evolution of vision than eyes. Along the way we touched on topics such as the explanatory role of theories and how testable hypotheses are deduced from them. I submit this thread as my introduction.
A few members are under the impression that evolution helps bind together every field pertaining to biological organisms. As such, next week I'll talk about why it fails at properly explaining animal behavior and cognition. A few members are knowledgeable in psychology an neuroscience, so it should be a worthwhile discussion. I look forward to that thread.
In the meantime, I hope everybody has nice weekend.
~J6B
I’ll be biting my nails in anticipation.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 8:49 am
(August 9, 2019 at 6:12 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: (August 8, 2019 at 11:39 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Thread Conclusion:
Even though the purpose of this thread was just for me to test the waters and learn the format of this site, I hope the exchange illustrated that there is more to the evolution of vision than eyes. Along the way we touched on topics such as the explanatory role of theories and how testable hypotheses are deduced from them. I submit this thread as my introduction.
A few members are under the impression that evolution helps bind together every field pertaining to biological organisms. As such, next week I'll talk about why it fails at properly explaining animal behavior and cognition. A few members are knowledgeable in psychology an neuroscience, so it should be a worthwhile discussion. I look forward to that thread.
In the meantime, I hope everybody has nice weekend.
~J6B
I’ll be biting my nails in anticipation.
How can he explain faults in a theory he clearly does not understand at even a rudimentary level.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 8:49 am
(August 8, 2019 at 11:23 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: (August 8, 2019 at 10:56 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol
Wait, did he just claim you are stalking him? It is to laugh.
IKR? How dare I ask him such completely distracting and irrelevant questions like, “do you accept that evolution is true?” and “are you a Christian?” Harassment, I say!
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 8:50 am
(August 9, 2019 at 8:49 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: (August 9, 2019 at 6:12 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: I’ll be biting my nails in anticipation.
How can he explain faults in a theory he clearly does not understand at even a rudimentary level.
He can’t. But, that won’t stop him from trying, lol.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 12:24 pm
(August 9, 2019 at 6:12 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: I’ll be biting my nails in anticipation.
Speaking for myself, it almost gives me wood. Almost...
Posts: 8280
Threads: 47
Joined: September 12, 2015
Reputation:
42
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 2:24 pm
(This post was last modified: August 9, 2019 at 2:29 pm by Pat Mustard.)
(August 8, 2019 at 6:24 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: "...Laws don't work in science because laws deal with fixed and fully known situations."
Explain this portion; what exactly is your position on laws? I'm not sure I understand.
Fuck it I can troll better than this:
Quote:My heart
Was broken
My heart
Was broken
Sorrow, Sorrow, Sorrow Sorrow
(August 8, 2019 at 7:02 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Also, he seems to be attaching sentience to nature when that's not what natural selection suggests at all.
Nature doesn't actively throw dice until something good happens. Rather, stuff happens naturally, and then just by random chance, something comes up that just happens to work really well (compared to something else), and because of that will be more pronounced than that something else and dominate. Very abstract and simplistic but hopefully should put him in the right direction instead of thinking that Mother Nature is a literal sentient being.
The fact about evolution is that while the mutations are random, over time the selection isn't. What gets selected is the organisms best adapted to the environmental conditions in existence.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Posts: 6610
Threads: 73
Joined: May 31, 2014
Reputation:
56
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 9, 2019 at 4:39 pm
(August 9, 2019 at 2:24 pm)Nomad Wrote: (August 8, 2019 at 6:24 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: "...Laws don't work in science because laws deal with fixed and fully known situations."
Explain this portion; what exactly is your position on laws? I'm not sure I understand.
Fuck it I can troll better than this:
Quote:My heart
Was broken
My heart
Was broken
Sorrow, Sorrow, Sorrow Sorrow
(August 8, 2019 at 7:02 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Also, he seems to be attaching sentience to nature when that's not what natural selection suggests at all.
Nature doesn't actively throw dice until something good happens. Rather, stuff happens naturally, and then just by random chance, something comes up that just happens to work really well (compared to something else), and because of that will be more pronounced than that something else and dominate. Very abstract and simplistic but hopefully should put him in the right direction instead of thinking that Mother Nature is a literal sentient being.
The fact about evolution is that while the mutations are random, over time the selection isn't. What gets selected is the organisms best adapted to the environmental conditions in existence.
Agreed. I hope that post didn't imply otherwise.
|
