RE: Would any of you drive a car made by Darwin's ideas?
March 13, 2014 at 4:26 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2014 at 5:17 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(March 13, 2014 at 12:10 pm)professor Wrote: You guys seem to have missed the foundation of Darwin's theory.
That RANDOM changes occured over time.
We didn't miss it so badly as to be the ones to bring cars into it.
(March 13, 2014 at 12:10 pm)professor Wrote: Random means "Chance" and chance is the opposite of choice.
Chance is having no intellegence added.
Natural selection is not random. That's why the combination of random variation with natural selection can result in the superficial appearance of design.
(March 13, 2014 at 12:10 pm)professor Wrote: The development of all tech. is the result of applied intellegence.
Even the Pinto.
Yep. Do you think that is news of some sort to anyone here?
(March 13, 2014 at 12:10 pm)professor Wrote: You can call development that we do "Evolution" but that is not what darwin proposed.
Evolution is 'change over time'. In that sense it applies perfectly to the development of automobiles. The theory of evolution explains biological evolution; which has nothing really to do with cars. Maybe you should leave cars out of discussions of biological evolution in future.
(March 13, 2014 at 12:35 pm)professor Wrote: I now understand.
I should have promoted natural selection to the status of a god, making it's decisions on what it wants to keep and what it wants to throw out. Very good.
You have gotten rid of that pesky god you didn't like, and gotten a new one instead.
Well done.
Do you get paid double for posts that are especially inane? If so, well done.
Natural selection is a process. It is not a being. It is not a god. It doesn't make decisions. It doesn't want anything. We don't worship it. It's just what happens when something that reproduces with some variation is in an environment that affects whether a variation is more likely to reproduce or not.
Try to wrap your brain around this: it is actually possible for people to not believe in any gods at all, not substitute anything for them, and not worship anything.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: Boy, I haven't has this much mirth in a while. My origional post is based on the origional supposition of Mr. Darwin.
Yes, you connected a biological theory to car manufacture. And you still think that was clever. I'm very much afraid you are getting the short end of the stick, mirth-wise; you're just not aware enough to tell.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: I confess I haven't paid much attention to the old fool since I heard about his theory in grade school.
No kidding. I take it grade school was a VERY long time ago.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: As for constructing a god out of natural selection, anything that makes decisions is not a process.
Natural selection doesn't make decisions.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: By necessity, decisionmaking requires a mind.
Natural selection doesn't make decisions.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: A god would have a mind.
Therefore your god is natural selection.
Natural selection doesn't make decisions. Gravity doesn't decide which rocks will roll downhill. Clouds don't decide where to rain.
(March 13, 2014 at 2:09 pm)professor Wrote: My initial thought with this post was, you guys would never use darwinian principles to go to grandma's house- you would never get there.
In these days of electronic navigation, an app that uses 'Darwinian principles' to optimize routes might be very useful.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: We would rather not buy a car assembled on friday (or is it monday?) in case there was any shortcuts in it's construction, and yet you think this whole shebang just assembled itself?
Assembling themselves one of the defining traits of living things. Horses assemble themselves, you assembled yourself, cars don't assemlbe themselves, which is one way you can tell they're not alive. Our cells are full of molecular widgets assembling themselves.
(March 13, 2014 at 1:27 pm)professor Wrote: I see a huge disconnect betweeen everyday life (including making very complicated machines) and the belief system that has become a dogma.
What the theory of evolution is FOR is to explain the diversity of life. It does that better than any competing theory. Anything else it may do, as in the links generously provided by others, which you've ignored, is gravy. You're like someone complaing that a saw doesn't do a very good job of hammering nails. You're THAT funny. If I couldn't see that at least you can spell pretty well, I'd feel bad for finding the depth of your fooishness so funny, but as you're not actually impaired, I'll enjoy.
