Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 7:19 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
#31
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 1:52 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:
(May 8, 2017 at 1:34 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The question isn't always whether there is or is not a developmental path for a feature; but rather, whether or not it is possible to overcome the physical constraints to get there within the time it supposedly took to develop. It doesn't seem like anyone really knows how many fitness-enhancing mutations must happen and if that number can be attained by chance alone.

But mutations do not have to happen in isolation, one after the other, there are many different mutations in the entire population and any could help the development of whatever directly or indirectly and come together as the population breeds. There are currently 7,000,000,000 humans mutating and breeding and apparently evolution has sped up as a result. our brains have shrunk rather alarmingly for one thing.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...ution.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep/25-...-shrinking

I guess that rules out the Tomorrow People. Our future is Idiocracy. Sounds about right.
Reply
#32
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 12:33 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:
(May 7, 2017 at 4:56 pm)alpha male Wrote: Not necessarily. People always talk about a photosensitive cell. By itself, it's no better than nothing at all.

If it gives information to the animal that other similar animals don't get wouldn't that be an advantage?

By itself, no. Information is only an advantage if it leads to advantageous behavior.
Reply
#33
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 2:48 pm)alpha male Wrote:
(May 8, 2017 at 12:33 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: If it gives information to the animal that other similar animals don't get wouldn't that be an advantage?

By itself, no. Information is only an advantage if it leads to advantageous behavior.

WELL DUH.
Reply
#34
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 2:49 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:
(May 8, 2017 at 2:48 pm)alpha male Wrote: By itself, no. Information is only an advantage if it leads to advantageous behavior.

WELL DUH.

So you're just assuming that the information would automatically lead to advantageous behavior?
Reply
#35
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 2:22 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:
(May 8, 2017 at 1:52 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: But mutations do not have to happen in isolation, one after the other, there are many different mutations in the entire population and any could help the development of whatever directly or indirectly and come together as the population breeds. There are currently 7,000,000,000 humans mutating and breeding and apparently evolution has sped up as a result. our brains have shrunk rather alarmingly for one thing.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...ution.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep/25-...-shrinking

I guess that rules out the Tomorrow People. Our future is Idiocracy. Sounds about right.

Actually, the human brain has shrunk in a strict sense, but has developed a denser and more efficient structure which in turn has lead to increasing intelligence. There's also the factor of our bodies being less muscular than they needed to be tens of thousands of years ago, since the vast majority of us are no longer vulnerable to death-by-leopard. This has freed up computing capacity for higher-level thinking.
[Image: rySLj1k.png]

If you have any serious concerns, are being harassed, or just need someone to talk to, feel free to contact me via PM
Reply
#36
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 2:52 pm)alpha male Wrote:
(May 8, 2017 at 2:49 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: WELL DUH.

So you're just assuming that the information would automatically lead to advantageous behavior?

No, I'm assuming that you are being relentlessly pedantic.
Reply
#37
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
alpha male Wrote:
Thumpalumpacus Wrote:I'd suggest you look up "scaffolding". No mutation exists in a vacuum. Their environment is not only the outer world, but the genetic environment the mutations arise in. A light-sensitive cell arises in a brainless animal? You might have a point. It arises in an animal which has a brain? The possibility of processing exists. If it can and does, then you've got a whole 'nother ball of wax.

More creationist binary thinking on display here.

Yes, if: a cell becomes photosensitive through a copying error; the cell is hooked by nerves to a brain; and, the brain by chance directs useful behavior based on the information from the cell, then you have something. Needing all those things is why it's irreducibly complex. You could have a photosensitive cell on your elbow right now. It wouldn't change a thing, because your brain isn't wired to process input from your elbow visually. If the evolutionary view is true we should have eyes on the back of our heads or in other places.

'Irreducibly complex' is a claim. You can't stop there. It's not a synonym for 'I find this unlikely'. Unlikely things happen all the time. Why shouldn't a cell that already has a nerve connecting it to a brain have a mutation that makes it photosensitive?

And if you think evolution calls for eyes on the back of our heads or on our elbows, you've missed very important parts of the theory entirely and are currently incapable of making true claims about what evolution entails except by chance.

Neo-Scholastic Wrote:
downbeatplumb Wrote:But mutations do not have to happen in isolation, one after the other, there are many different mutations in the entire population and any could help the development of whatever directly or indirectly and come together as the population breeds. There are currently 7,000,000,000 humans mutating and breeding and apparently evolution has sped up as a result. our brains have shrunk rather alarmingly for one thing.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...ution.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep/25-...-shrinking

I guess that rules out the Tomorrow People. Our future is Idiocracy. Sounds about right.

If it's any consolation, smaller doesn't necessarily mean stupider, up to a point.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#38
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 4:21 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:
alpha male Wrote:Yes, if: a cell becomes photosensitive through a copying error; the cell is hooked by nerves to a brain; and, the brain by chance directs useful behavior based on the information from the cell, then you have something. Needing all those things is why it's irreducibly complex. You could have a photosensitive cell on your elbow right now. It wouldn't change a thing, because your brain isn't wired to process input from your elbow visually. If the evolutionary view is true we should have eyes on the back of our heads or in other places.

'Irreducibly complex' is a claim. You can't stop there. It's not a synonym for 'I find this unlikely'. Unlikely things happen all the time. Why shouldn't a cell that already has a nerve connecting it to a brain have a mutation that makes it photosensitive?

And if you think evolution calls for eyes on the back of our heads or on our elbows, you've missed very important parts of the theory entirely and are currently incapable of making true claims about what evolution entails except by chance.

Neo-Scholastic Wrote:I guess that rules out the Tomorrow People. Our future is Idiocracy. Sounds about right.

If it's any consolation, smaller doesn't necessarily mean stupider, up to a point.

Indeed typical creationist simple think. It's quite possible that the first eye cells were just derived from sensor  cells that through natural selection and mutation acquired the capability to see yet another type of radiation. Connect through a nerve network to the brain (or through a simple in uncentralized Neuro network     .As for positioning of eyes that's simply the fact that it's closet to the brain and the number is easily explained by efficacy and the simple fact more eyes isn't better.  So no having eyes all over the place isn't a prediction of evolution quite the contrary if the above is true.

And yes the idea that a brain is smaller does not mean the brain works less well.
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
#39
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 7, 2017 at 7:35 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(May 7, 2017 at 4:56 pm)alpha male Wrote: Not necessarily. People always talk about a photosensitive cell. By itself, it's no better than nothing at all.

You think so?  Odd, since all complex life on earth is predicate upon those useless photo-receptors and their ability to track the sun..............

OFC, you don't actually need a cell for that, photo-reactive compounds like auxin can, by virtue of their chemical (not structural) composition, convey some benefit...and they do - most of the time in concert with those useless cells above.  Tinkergod™ clearly had a thing for the stuff it's believers don't believe in, shits literally everywhere.

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.

If an organism can find food, reproduce and avoid predators with nothing more than light sensitive cells, it will survive, and eyes will not evolve unless the environment changes.
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.
Reply
#40
RE: The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye
(May 8, 2017 at 6:15 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:
(May 7, 2017 at 7:35 pm)Khemikal Wrote: You think so?  Odd, since all complex life on earth is predicate upon those useless photo-receptors and their ability to track the sun..............

OFC, you don't actually need a cell for that, photo-reactive compounds like auxin can, by virtue of their chemical (not structural) composition, convey some benefit...and they do - most of the time in concert with those useless cells above.  Tinkergod™ clearly had a thing for the stuff it's believers don't believe in, shits literally everywhere.

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.

If an organism can find food, reproduce and avoid predators with nothing more than light sensitive cells, it will survive, and eyes will not evolve unless the environment changes.

Indeed I also point out that a so called "useless" cell can still be useful in another capacity. Creationists live in the delusion a part must play the role it does now or play it's current role in the way it does now. In there minds life is a watch with specific components. Life is not so rigid on meta scale.
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  [Serious] Link between brain damage and religious fundamentalism established Fake Messiah 9 976 November 18, 2019 at 12:14 am
Last Post: John 6IX Breezy
  Missing Link to A Missing Link! Minimalist 9 739 October 28, 2018 at 7:25 am
Last Post: Jehanne
  Tips on how to boost eye health purplepurpose 24 2508 March 3, 2018 at 8:52 pm
Last Post: AFTT47
  The "Complexity of the Eye", for stupid creationists. Gawdzilla Sama 10 1829 December 8, 2017 at 3:41 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Single celled creature with functioning eye. downbeatplumb 19 6136 December 14, 2015 at 2:58 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Bionic eye implant world first zebo-the-fat 12 3785 July 22, 2015 at 2:58 pm
Last Post: QuarkDriven
  Intelligent Design: Irreducible Complexity? OfficerVajardian 49 12506 August 17, 2014 at 2:37 pm
Last Post: Esquilax
  Eye the Size of a Softball thesummerqueen 22 5869 October 15, 2012 at 11:36 pm
Last Post: popeyespappy
  Light-powered bionic eye invented to help restore sight zebo-the-fat 7 4059 June 13, 2012 at 5:37 am
Last Post: frankiej
  Ten Sticks in the Eye for Creationist Morons in 2011 Minimalist 5 3161 January 1, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Last Post: TheDarkestOfAngels



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)