RE: Richard Dawkin's big blunder
March 15, 2014 at 4:22 pm
(This post was last modified: March 15, 2014 at 4:36 pm by Heywood.)
(March 15, 2014 at 1:35 am)Esquilax Wrote: What would "evolution without a target," even look like, to you?
Unguided evolution would be descent with change. There would be no cumulative selection. It would look like the random sentence generator in Dawkins' example.
(March 15, 2014 at 2:08 am)max-greece Wrote: I will have one more go at this to see how honest you are being in your inability to see how ridiculous you are being.
This pig-like creature lived in India about 55 million years ago. It was about the size of a domestic cat.
What did it become?
If you know that's fine - but are you really claiming its off-spring were potentially predictable? A potential target? Guided design?
What designer - if aiming for the target state of today's creatures (its offspring) would start from here?
The creature probably became a few different species. But if I had to guess which species is the answer you are looking for, I would say homo sapiens. I remember watching a documentary about human evolution and it featured a creature like this living near water. My second guess would be elephant.
If human beings lived in micro gravity for a long enough time, I predict we would effectively loose our legs. If we didn't loose our legs/feet they would become more arm/hand like.
If a designer is in the picture so to speak. He wouldn't start from your creature. He would have started at abiogenesis.