Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How exactly do you know that this is impossible?...Because it's impossible that 6 or 7 different species developed "flight" independently and separate from one another.
Convergent evolution - Wikipedia...Because it's impossible that 6 or 7 different species developed "flight" independently and separate from one another.
View attachment 26008 View attachment 26009 View attachment 26010 View attachment 26011 View attachment 26012
View attachment 26013
How exactly do you know that this is impossible?
And yes, to a certain degree I do believe there is more to how evolution actually works then the idea of pure arbitrariness. It's a bit more intelligent than that, but not in the sense of some outside mind pulling the strings in some grand plan to make things looks a certain way. It's more that once evolution has figured something out, it doesn't reinvent the wheel every time, but simply repeats a pattern laid down before it.Oops. Beat me to it.
Convergent evolution - Wikipedia
- Convergent evolution is the independent evolution of similar features in species of different lineages. Convergent evolution creates analogous structures that have similar form or function but were not present in the last common ancestor of those groups. The cladistic term for the same phenomenon is homoplasy. The recurrent evolution of flight is a classic example, as flying insects, birds, pterosaurs, and bats have independently evolved the useful capacity of flight. Functionally similar features that have arisen through convergent evolution are analogous, whereas homologous structures or traits have a common origin but can have dissimilar functions. Bird, bat, and pterosaur wings are analogous structures, but their forelimbs are homologous, sharing an ancestral state despite serving different functions.
It doesn't demonstrate whether or not mutations are random, but it does demonstrate that the combined process of variation and natural selection has found flight-related changes advantageous in several different types of organism.I believe it's called "convergent evolution". I find it extremely bazaar and highly unlikely. So unlikely, that it is impossible. It should be clear that mutations are not random, but are based on environmental needs. Somehow.
...Because it's impossible that 6 or 7 different species developed "flight" independently and separate from one another.
View attachment 26008 View attachment 26009 View attachment 26010 View attachment 26011 View attachment 26012
View attachment 26013
so your argument is that of incredulity...you can't believe it, therefore it can't have happened...I believe it's called "convergent evolution". I find it extremely bazaar and highly unlikely. So unlikely, that it is impossible. It should be clear that mutations are not random, but are based on environmental needs. Somehow.
Yes, I replied separately a minute ago, as we cross-posted.Yes, there is a definition for it, however doesn't it suggest that mutations are based on environmental needs or allowances? And are not ultimately "random"?
It doesn't demonstrate whether or not mutations are random, but it does demonstrate that the combined process of variation and natural selection has found flight-related changes advantageous in several different types of organism.
Selection is anything but "random".
A further thought to this to add, if you are not familiar with the concept:Yes, there is a definition for it, however doesn't it suggest that mutations are based on environmental needs or allowances? And are not ultimately "random"?
Seems to be so.so your argument is that of incredulity...you can't believe it, therefore it can't have happened...
Shoot, I'd settle for just some evidence to support his argument. So far, it's literally nothing more than what you described above.Can you quantify your incredulity? Give us some statistics or something to back up that it is bazaar and so unlikely that the unlikeliness = impossibility?
So Landon, look closely at the pics you posted. One thing that should stand out to you is how different taxa achieve flight via very diverse means. With the flying squirrel it's a flap of skin between limbs. But with birds it's via hollow bones, feathers, and modified forelimbs. Then with insects its via outgrowths of the exoskeleton....Because it's impossible that 6 or 7 different species developed "flight" independently and separate from one another.
View attachment 26008 View attachment 26009 View attachment 26010 View attachment 26011 View attachment 26012
View attachment 26013
Mutations are random, selection obviously is not.Yes, there is a definition for it, however doesn't it suggest that mutations are based on environmental needs or allowances? And are not ultimately "random"?
You need to read a bit about feathers. There is a nice little section on their evolution here: Feather - Wikipedia It's quite interesting.But the mutations didn't occur overnight. It would have taken a millions of years for the flying squirrel to have had flappy, unflyable skin turn into something useful.
...Same with all the rest who forfeited their front limbs. And for feathers to have coincidentally developed, I can only imagine wings would have only been advantageous for slapping prey around. But even that does not seem advantageous.