RE: By chance?
February 3, 2020 at 4:00 pm
(This post was last modified: February 3, 2020 at 4:11 pm by Simon Moon.)
(February 3, 2020 at 12:23 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote: “Your mistake (among many) is assuming the owl eye pattern was a goal, instead of the result of providing a survival advantage.”
Well if the eye pattern was not a goal, how convenient that chance mutations created some trait that fits perfectly into the butterfly’s scheme of life?
Some evos here still claim that NS has creative ability when in fact it is the raw materials of mutations that are behind it all
And yes these mutations are totally random and what ever you say cannot change that, who can admit the resultant luck of mutations is mind boggling!
So much wrong in only 3 sentences. Where to start....
Quote:Well if the eye pattern was not a goal, how convenient that chance mutations created some trait that fits perfectly into the butterfly’s scheme of life?
Lets say a population of butterflies has a mutation for spots on the wings that don't look too much like eyes, but some predators on quick glance, see them as being close enough to eyes, they avoid these butterflies. So, this population of butterflies has a better overall survival rate, so the breed more and pass their genes to further generations. Those without the spots will be eaten more often. Further mutations that cause spots to look a bit more like eyes, would provide even a bit more survival advantage, affording this population a higher survival rate than those with simple spots.
The mutations may be random, the selection process is not.
The trait does not fit 'perfectly' into the butterflies 'scheme of life'. Some of them are still eaten.
Quote:Some evos here still claim that NS has creative ability when in fact it is the raw materials of mutations that are behind it all
Mutation happen in every generation to every member of a population. You have 68 mutations that your parents did not have. Some are negative for survival, some are neutral to survival, and some few are advantageous to survival. Natural selection is the driver of evolution, because, depending on environmental pressure, only those mutations negative (to survival) will be selected against.
Quote:And yes these mutations are totally random and what ever you say cannot change that, who can admit the resultant luck of mutations is mind boggling!
Not 'totally' random. Strict laws of chemistry and physics dictate a very limited way genes can mutate. But yes, there is some randomness in the mutation process. But which mutations are selected for, selected against, or ignored, is not random.
By the way...
What does any of this biology have to do with atheism?
I hate to break it to you, but even if evolution were to be proven wrong and totally overturned tomorrow*, that would not provide one bit of evidence that some god was involved in the diversity of life on earth.
Your 'hypothesis' that a god is responsible has to be supported on its own merits, with its own demonstrable, repeatable, and falsifiable evidence.
No amount of your arguments from personal incredulity, and argument from ignorance, will demonstrate a god exists.
* it won't be, its been observed in the lab and field, and in every singly field of science that deals with the subject.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.