- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
10 May 15
Originally posted by KellyJayYou don't really think we believe light-sensitive spots appeared out of nowhere, do you? Evolution 101 should tell you that evolution works slowly, over many generations. New features don't just pop into existence out of nowhere. But judging from your inept criticism, you never took evolution 101, did you?
I have read that too, here and elsewhere, but if you think about that, does it make even a
little bit of sense? Thinking about how something that was never aware of light suddenly
became aware of it, so now it knows what to do with the new light information it is now
getting? That to me is a very large leap of faith that I assume just has to be accepted ...[text shortened]... , as some have suggested here.
If I'm wrong about any of this, could you point out my errors?
Here, another link explaining not the evolution of the eye, but evolution itself, because you really need to start from the basics. Berkeley's Evolution 101. Enjoy:
http://tinyurl.com/d6v2r5
10 May 15
Originally posted by C HessI'm glad you joined us while we were talking among ourselves.
You don't really think we believe light-sensitive spots appeared out of nowhere, do you? Evolution 101 should tell you that evolution works slowly, over many generations. New features don't just pop into existence out of nowhere. But judging from your inept criticism, you never took evolution 101, did you?
Here, another link explaining not the evolution of ...[text shortened]... y need to start from the basics. Berkeley's Evolution 101. Enjoy:
http://tinyurl.com/d6v2r5
Slow, fast, it doesn't matter the point is still the same. It was not there, then it was, and
along with it all the abilities to communicate and alter behavior. None of my points go
away if the light spot took a million years to appear, thousands of years to appear, or two
generations.
I'll continue talking to you if you can refrain for the words like "my inept criticism" I've
taken to just ignoring those that are both mean spirited and insulting here and frankly if
this is what I can except from you, I can add you list. After 10 years its up to 8 people
here, I've no issue making it 9. If wish to put me on your ignore list feel free, I am frankly
tired of people who only communicate through insult.
10 May 15
Originally posted by KellyJayYou assume wrong. Not only is there reasonably good evidence that you can check for yourself if you wish, but you don't have to accept it at all. Science is not a religion in whereby you just have to accept everything you are told. If you have studied the evidence and think it points somewhere else, then you are free to propose your own hypothesis and, if you so choose, publish it. Just be prepared to have any problems with it checked and criticized by others.
That to me is a very large leap of faith that I assume just has to be accepted.
So out of now where a light sensitive spot appears, why and how no one knows!
Actually, in some cases, people do know.
10 May 15
Originally posted by KellyJayYou have my permission to insult them back. I find it gives me a chuckle and makes me feel better and sometimes superior if I believe I have gotten a better one in. Sometimes it is necessary to fight fire with fire. 😏
I'm glad you joined us while we were talking among ourselves.
Slow, fast, it doesn't matter the point is still the same. It was not there, then it was, and
along with it all the abilities to communicate and alter behavior. None of my points go
away if the light spot took a million years to appear, thousands of years to appear, or two
generations.
I'l ...[text shortened]... n your ignore list feel free, I am frankly
tired of people who only communicate through insult.
Originally posted by twhiteheadHowever, your so-called science of evilution and billions of years is a religion. 😏
You assume wrong. Not only is there reasonably good evidence that you can check for yourself if you wish, but you don't have to accept it at all. Science is not a religion in whereby you just have to accept everything you are told. If you have studied the evidence and think it points somewhere else, then you are free to propose your own hypothesis and, if ...[text shortened]... sensitive spot appears, why and how no one knows!
Actually, in some cases, people do know.[/b]
Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually, in some cases, people do know.
Just not twhitehead and evilutionists
11 May 15
Originally posted by RJHindsI'm not above that, and when I do I normally don't feel better for it. I do have a temper so
You have my permission to insult them back. I find it gives me a chuckle and makes me feel better and sometimes superior if I believe I have gotten a better one in. Sometimes it is necessary to fight fire with fire. 😏
I attempt to not go there.
11 May 15
Originally posted by KellyJayMy father had a bifurcated renal artery - that is a physically different anatomy to others.
It was not there, then it was, and
along with it all the abilities to communicate and alter behavior. None of my points go
away if the light spot took a million years to appear, thousands of years to appear, or two
generations.
That "appeared from nowhere."
Now if such a difference was advantageous then given enough time everyone would have one.
And people like you would be saying "It was not there, then it was, and ..."
11 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59
My father had a bifurcated renal artery - that is a physically different anatomy to others.
That "appeared from nowhere."
Now if such a difference was advantageous then given enough time everyone would have one.
And people like you would be saying "It was not there, then it was, and ..."
11 May 15
Originally posted by wolfgang59How do you know that everyone would have one? That sounds like a religious belief to me. 😏
My father had a bifurcated renal artery - that is a physically different anatomy to others.
That "appeared from nowhere."
Now if such a difference was advantageous then given enough time everyone would have one.
And people like you would be saying "It was not there, then it was, and ..."
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
11 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayI'll try not to insult you, but you're a really annoying person to have a conversation with. If you had read all the links provided to you, by now, you'd be able to answer your own question. I don't mean this as an insult, but we've practically spoon fed you here.
I'm glad you joined us while we were talking among ourselves.
Slow, fast, it doesn't matter the point is still the same. It was not there, then it was, and
along with it all the abilities to communicate and alter behavior. None of my points go
away if the light spot took a million years to appear, thousands of years to appear, or two
generations.
The photoreceptive cell is a type of neuron, the same type of cell that allows your skin cells to detect touch and temperature differences. Let's say a single basepair mutation happens to a single individual, affecting spots of neurons, that doesn't mean that this individual all of a sudden has the ability to detect light. It may only affect how a protein is folded to no apparent effect. But this individual is successful enough to reproduce, and pass on this single basepair mutation to some of its offspring, who may pass it on to theirs and so on. At some point, if the mutation in question survives the generations, it will have spread to a large enough population, as to be fixed. Other individuals may carry other mutations that spread through the population in the same manner, and these mutations converge, giving populations X number of generations later the benefit of all these mutations.
Since a light-sensitive cell is a type of neuron, once enough base-pair mutations have accumulated to allow it to react to light stimuli, the connection to the brain is already there, and the organism doesn't have to understand what light means in order to react. Those who for some reason react to light in a manner that is detrimental to their survival die out, leaving only those who react well enough (not perfectly) to survive.
And so the ground is set for the next step of evolutionary development, for that and possibly other related populations.
It should also be noted that it's not just a matter of being able to detect light, but the number of light-sensitive neurons and their locations will determine how much light the organism can detect, and also how it reacts to (uses) the light it detects. This too is a gradual build-up that natural selection will work on.
So you see, it's not like an individual organism in the pre-cambrian suddenly detected light. It was a gradual development, a convergence of mutations in many different individuals, allowing a larger population to gradually learn to perceive light and react to it, over literally thousands of generations. It matters if you say this happened in two generations or many, many more. And it matters if you claim this happened to one individual, or in tiny steps through many individuals, allowing for a gradual build-up.
Originally posted by C HessI believe KellyJay and I understand this type of speculation that you are describing. However, this type of speculative assumptions are so improbable that it is the same as believing in millions of accidental miracles. To us it is easier to believe a super intelligent designer did it, like the God of the Holy Bible. Not only that, but the idea seems to even violate Darwin's natural selection theory.
I'll try not to insult you, but you're a really annoying person to have a conversation with. If you had read all the links provided to you, by now, you'd be able to answer your own question. I don't mean this as an insult, but we've practically spoon fed you here.
The photoreceptive cell is a type of neuron, the same type of cell that allows your skin cell ...[text shortened]... d to one individual, or in tiny steps through many individuals, allowing for a gradual build-up.
I believe your explanation requires much more faith in the improbable than I am capable of.
I understand that man has come a long way using his intelligence in developing computers and photoelectric cells, cameras, radar, and such. However, nobody would be stupid enough to claim these just developed by themselves any more than an automobile or airplane developed on their own without an intelligent designer. And I still think Darwin was right when he said it seems absurd to suggest that the eye developed by itself back when he wrote his book on the Origin of the Species and I believe it is still absurd today. 😏
Originally posted by C HessThe reason I am asking for a conversation is to point out you have nothing other than
I'll try not to insult you, but you're a really annoying person to have a conversation with. If you had read all the links provided to you, by now, you'd be able to answer your own question. I don't mean this as an insult, but we've practically spoon fed you here.
The photoreceptive cell is a type of neuron, the same type of cell that allows your skin cell ...[text shortened]... d to one individual, or in tiny steps through many individuals, allowing for a gradual build-up.
possible beliefs nothing solid in the form of evidence! "If the mutation survives...", as well
as "Other individuals may carry..." The fact is there are no facts, a lot of conjecture which
is was what I said, you have something you believe in.
Even touch isn't much different than sight in that it is something that is a stimuli, which
would if understood generate a reaction. You seem to just gloss over this as if it is no big
deal, when you shouldn't. Doing work of any kind requires something that directs it, even
if it is a knee jerk reaction, there needs to be put into the life form all the necessary
things required to make any reaction from movement, eating, reproducing, and so on. I
agree it does not have to understand to react, but all the necessary pieces of a system
are required to be in place and functioning to get it too.
Right now with what you've presented I don't see how you can say this is evidence that
is driving your beliefs, it is more like "well it could have happen this way.", it is a belief
system based upon the theories of men. The scary part is that it is so bought into hook
line and sinker as some here have said, people don't even have their own views they just
accept what was written. *I don't believe that, but I do think if is true it is lazy."
11 May 15
Originally posted by KellyJayLet's for the moment say the eye didn't come about by evolution by the process of natural selection. Explain to us how it did. How did the eye and all it's various forms come into existence?
The reason I am asking for a conversation is to point out you have nothing other than
possible beliefs nothing solid in the form of evidence! "If the mutation survives...", as well
as "Other individuals may carry..." The fact is there are no facts, a lot of conjecture which
is was what I said, you have something you believe in.
Even touch isn't much ...[text shortened]... hey just
accept what was written. *I don't believe that, but I do think if is true it is lazy."