Is Mankind A Fluke?

[Cooky]

I'm trying to make it as complex as is any conscious person. I think a 747 is a bit simplistic in comparison.

It is. And to make things worse, life has learned to fly at least 4 times independently, and functioning eyes have developed at least twice independently, and I have just discovered that the ability to recognize one's self in a mirror has developed in magpie birds, independently, without even having a neocortex, which is a shocking example of convergent evolution.

Mirror Self-recognition In Magpie Birds

 

[Cooky]

Evolution has not just time and change -- and has as mechanism for selection of beneficial change and rejection of non-beneficial change. Your silly hurricane has nothing of the sort at all.

But "common sense" should tell us that mutations must occur prior to selection. And that in nature, we're essentially seeing tornadoes produce fully fueled 747's many times over, with convergent evolution.

...Do you realize how many times crabs have evolved independently..?

Crabs and Convergent Evolution: Carcinization Explained

 

[ChristineM]

If there is no scientific law that states it's impossible for a tornado to produce a fully fueled 747, then it's obvious that science cannot be the sole arbitrator of knowledge.

...There quite clearly needs to be some use of common sense.

There is common sense, that's why they don't dismiss the unlikely as impossible like some people do even if the chance is extremely remote
That is why i included the vid of one of the worlds leading scientists saying exactly the same thing but using sand instead of scrap.
You may not like the idea, you may think it lacks common sense (incidentally so do i, but it is not me or you who decides)

 

[exchemist]

I'm trying to make it as complex as is any conscious person. I think a 747 is a bit simplistic in comparison.

OK. Have you addressed yourself yet to the point several posters have now made, that evolution works by selection, not chance? If not, do you intend to do so?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

But "common sense" should tell us that mutations must occur prior to selection.

Yes, that is true. Mutations occur, and if the mutation results in a competetive advantage for producing a new generation, that mutation will be carried forward. If it results in impaired ability to produce new viable offspring, it will be selected again -- all entirely naturally.

And that in nature, we're essentially seeing tornadoes produce fully fueled 747's many times over, with convergent evolution.

Not sure what you mean by that. Nature is NOT using tornadoes to produce anything. Nature is using the simple facts of natural mutation, and selection based on any mutation's ability to increase the odds of producing a next generation.

...Do you realize how many times crabs have evolved independently..?

Crabs and Convergent Evolution: Carcinization Explained

But why should that be surprising? If crab-like organisms have excellent fitness for producing new generations, I'd expect crab-like organisms to evolve multiple times.

In the same way, eyes (or the ability to sense the external world using light) are very useful, have probably evolved independently some 40 or more times.

 

[Cooky]

OK. Have you addressed yourself yet to the point several posters have now made, that evolution works by selection, not chance? If not, do you intend to do so?

But why must we ignore that the mutation must occur first, which is the real catalyst. And that selection is only a refining (secondary) process in evolution.

 

[ChristineM]

But why must we ignore that the mutation must occur first, which is the real catalyst. And that selection is only a refining (secondary) process in evolution.

The mutation must be selected to continue

 

[Salty Booger]

OK. Have you addressed yourself yet to the point several posters have now made, that evolution works by selection, not chance? If not, do you intend to do so?

You make it sound so simple. Who is making the selection?

 

[Cooky]

Yes, that is true. Mutations occur, and if the mutation results in a competetive advantage for producing a new generation, that mutation will be carried forward. If it results in impaired ability to produce new viable offspring, it will be selected again -- all entirely naturally.

Not sure what you mean by that. Nature is NOT using tornadoes to produce anything. Nature is using the simple facts of natural mutation, and selection based on any mutation's ability to increase the odds of producing a next generation.

But why should that be surprising? If crab-like organisms have excellent fitness for producing new generations, I'd expect crab-like organisms to evolve multiple times.

In the same way, eyes (or the ability to sense the external world using light) are very useful, have probably evolved independently some 40 or more times.

It just seems really far fetched that so often mutations occur that just "happen" to be very useful. It's even more bizarre that the same mutations happen over and over independently, when the odds, using common sense, seem to be against it.

It's bizarre that these two unrelated plants would look so similar for absolutely no reason I can think of but both live at similar altitudes.

The odds of similar, mutations, through a successive process of mini-mutations, is in opposition to common sense.

Convergent evolution - Wikipedia

 

[Cooky]

I'm not saying evolution isn't real... It is!

...There's just something missing. there is some kind of communication that's happening, where needs are met, in order for complex arrangements of successive mutations to occur in what sometimes, even appears to be an orderly fashion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Thread moved to evolution vs creationalism - Adrian on behalf of the moderation team.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It just seems really far fetched that so often mutations occur that just "happen" to be very useful. It's even more bizarre that the same mutations happen over and over independently, when the odds, using common sense, seem to be against it.

It's bizarre that these two unrelated plants would look so similar for absolutely no reason I can think of but both live at similar altitudes.

The odds of similar mutations, through a successive process of mini-mutations is in opposition to common sense.

View attachment 46312 View attachment 46313

Convergent evolution - Wikipedia

But Cooky, you have to look wider. See, if you only look at the times that similar body plans or features have evolved separately, but ignore -- at the same -- the incredible variety of other body plans, then of course it will seem far-fetched.

To treat yourself, visit this side and just flip through the pictures of the 50 freakiest critters under the sea. And none of them bears the slightest resemblance to anything else you've ever seen.

 

[Cooky]

But Cooky, you have to look wider. See, if you only look at the times that similar body plans or features have evolved separately, but ignore -- at the same -- the incredible variety of other body plans, then of course it will seem far-fetched.

To treat yourself, visit this side and just flip through the pictures of the 50 freakiest critters under the sea. And none of them bears the slightest resemblance to anything else you've ever seen.

Well, you're right there. There's quite a bit of variation in life.

Our most distant relative:

Humans’ most distant animal relative found

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Well, you're right there. There's quite a bit of variation in life.

Our most distant relative:
View attachment 46314
Humans’ most distant animal relative found

Exactly! It seems that there is really no limit to what evolution can produce.

However, you then have to realize that life, all of it, has a few things that must be common to everything. It must be able to sustain itself (eat) and get rid of waste products. It must be able to repair itself. It must be able to reproduce itself. It must be able to defend itself.

So just those few things, if you stop and think about, will result in a lot of similar evolutionary strategies -- or convergent evolution, if you prefer. The development of mouth parts, gut and anus are pretty standard for animal life. Not surprising, and thus not surprising if there are multiple attempts that bear some similarity to one another. Self-protection is the same -- speed of escape should be a common evolutionary development, as well as camouflage, and defensive weapons like teeth, poisons or stinky parts, and so on.

 

[Father Heathen]

If a tornado set down on a junkyard for millions of years, then?

How the hell is genetic adaptation anything like a tornado? What an imbecilic analogy.

 

[Salty Booger]

How the hell is genetic adaptation anything like a tornado? What an imbecilic analogy.

Okay, a tornado that codes DNA strands over millions of years. Better?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Okay, a tornado that codes DNA strands over millions of years. Better?

You're reaching.....too far.

 

[Salty Booger]

You're reaching.....too far.

But the answer is so simple.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

But the answer is so simple.

A "simple" answer may seem satisfying to you. To many of us, it's also important that it be correct. Simple isn't quite enough.

 

[Salty Booger]

To many of us, it's also important that it be correct. Simple isn't quite enough.

And believing it is correct makes it correct?