Interesting Video - Simulating Natural Selection

Godobeyer said:

Wrong answser.
Chemistry is science,still did not explain how first life came to exist.

Click to expand...

But it does.
How did you not learn this in school?

Godobeyer said:

Without bleuprint to reproduction , there is no life.

Click to expand...

Without explanation for this, all I can ask is Prove it. Prove that without a blueprint to reproduction, there is no life. Or at least produce convincing evidence of it. If you can't then your assertion here rings as true as Donald Trump's claim of being an astute businessman.


.

Valjean said:

By "blueprint" do you mean plan, as in a pre-construction design?

There is no need for pre-planning, and the idea of a "first cell" is misleading.

Various components or parts of cells self-assemble by ordinary chemistry. This self-assembly, and even self reproduction, is observed by biologists every day.
As the components combine, more and more lifelike structures are created, but determining the point at which "life" or "cells" first appeared is like determining the point at which Latin turned into French.

Click to expand...

Yes.
Every species had bleuprint,your comment is weird and not reasonable.

HonestJoe said:

Simply claiming that there is a God doesn’t explain how life first came to exist either. You have nothing more to offer than anyone else on that question.

Luckily, this thread wasn’t about how life came to exist. Do you have any comments on the video I posted?

Click to expand...

Sorry for misleading this thread,to other paths and levels
Anyway ,natural selection did not deny the bleuprint

Godobeyer said:

Yes.
Every species had bleuprint,your comment is weird and not reasonable.

Click to expand...

Please tell me what you found unreasonable and I'll try to explain my point more clearly.

Q: By what physical mechanism do you think living cells first appeared? What physical forces do you think worked to assemble them?
What evidence do you have that life was pre-planned or pre-designed?

Godobeyer said:

Sorry for misleading this thread,to other paths and levels
Anyway ,natural selection did not deny the bleuprint

Click to expand...

True, natural selection does not deny a blueprint, it just denies that one is necessary and cites evidence that another, unguided mechanism of change is at work.

Natural selection proposes that individuals born with features better suited to their environments tend to have more reproductive success, passing on the useful features and gradually increasing their prevalence in the general population. There is no planning necessary for this mechanism to work. It selects for more useful features naturally, hence the name.

Godobeyer said:

Sorry for misleading this thread,to other paths and levels

Anyway ,natural selection did not deny the bleuprint

Click to expand...

You’ve not even tried to explain what you mean by “blueprint” so how could your idea be challenged? Nothing about the ideas of Natural Selection is even trying to deny that concept. DNA is commonly referred to as a "blueprint" of sorts, though I've no idea if that's what you mean.

Other than demanding that we all accept the existence of your God as a creator without question, you don’t seem to be actually presenting anything new. What is your point?

Valjean said:

By what physical mechanism do you think living cells first appeared?

Click to expand...

Surelly who made blueprint.

What physical forces do you think worked to assemble them?

Click to expand...

Surelly who made blueprint.

What evidence do you have that life was pre-planned or pre-designed?

Click to expand...

Not claver question,do you heard about mind suicide.
when mind see facts and reject them.

There is nothing plan it by self.
Everything species had pre-bleuprint,it's not random selection.

Let me put this sample exemple,serentily I know it may won't work.
See your face,lets suppose,there was no pre-bleuprint, your eyes may are places under your nose,mouth,everytime you eat,that's will be like suffer,just to protect your eyes,and your legs are in your hands,so go on millions of exemples,why not ?[/QUOTE]

Godobeyer said:

Surelly who made blueprint.
Surelly who made blueprint.
Not claver question,do you heard about mind suicide.
when mind see facts and reject them.

There is nothing plan it by self.
Everything species had pre-bleuprint,it's not random selection.

Let me put this sample exemple,serentily I know it may won't work.
See your face,lets suppose,there was no pre-bleuprint, your eyes may are places under your nose,mouth,everytime you eat,that's will be like suffer,just to protect your eyes,and your legs are in your hands,so go on millions of exemples,why not ?

Click to expand...

Because that doesn't increase the likelihood of passing on genes. That is the sole requirement for natural selection.

Your phrase 'random selection' is the problem here. Selection is NOT random: it is based on survival in an environment.

Godobeyer said:

Surelly who made blueprint.

Click to expand...

That isn’t an answer, it’s just another question. Who are you saying created the blueprint? Remember that “I don’t know” is a valid answer.

Godobeyer said:

See your face,lets suppose,there was no pre-bleuprint…

Click to expand...

Again, nobody is saying there is no “blueprint”. Why do you keep making an argument against an empty room?

Godobeyer said:

Yes.
Every species had bleuprint,your comment is weird and not reasonable.

Click to expand...

What is the blueprint exactly? The DNA?

Godobeyer said:

Surelly who made blueprint.
Surelly who made blueprint.

Click to expand...

I didn't ask about who, I asked about how.
If you insist there must be a who, you need to show me some evidence.

Not claver question,do you heard about mind suicide.
when mind see facts and reject them.

Click to expand...

But I don't see any relevant facts. Just declaring "there must be a designer" isn't evidence for a designer, nor does it support the need for a designer.

There is nothing plan it by self.
Everything species had pre-bleuprint,it's not random selection.

Click to expand...

You keep asserting this, but you've shown no evidence for your assertion, nor have you shown any reason why a plan or planner would be necessary.
On the other hand, biologists have shown a great deal of evidence for natural selection.

Let me put this sample exemple,serentily I know it may won't work.
See your face,lets suppose,there was no pre-bleuprint, your eyes may are places under your nose,mouth,everytime you eat,that's will be like suffer,just to protect your eyes,and your legs are in your hands,so go on millions of exemples,why not ?

Click to expand...

My body wasn't pre-planned. It was 'designed' by natural selection, by the mechanisms you should have learned in school. Yes, there is DNA involved, if you want to consider that a blueprint, but the DNA sequences were also selected by the natural, unplanned mechanisms described by biologists.

Godobeyer said:

anyway, everything life had bleuprint,that's fact.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "blueprint".
Be specific.

In your point Evolution Only, you right.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you are saying here and the capitalization of "Evolution Only" is rather confusing as well.

Godobeyer said:

Wrong answser.
Chemistry is science,

Click to expand...

Chemistry is a field of science yes

still did not explain how first life came to exist.​

Click to expand...