Creation vs Evolution

Started by Ymir221 pages

Oh. Then we're pretty much on the same page? Anyhow, I do hate it when Creationists accuse Evolution of being arbitrary. It really is very exact, and dynamic. Much like an intelligence, if you will, though I would never have jumped to that analogy.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
All I am saying is an outside intelligence is not needed for natural selection to work.

True, but an outside agent is more proficient when it comes to bringing out variation in populations. Which is why Artificial Selection creates more variety than Natural Selection.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
True, but an outside agent is more proficient when it comes to bringing out variation in populations. Which is why Artificial Selection creates more variety than Natural Selection.

If anything, the dynamism of the environment, and the constantly changing relationships between organism and environment would produce more heterogeneity than a commanding intelligence.

Originally posted by Ymir
Oh. Then we're pretty much on the same page? Anyhow, I do hate it when Creationists accuse Evolution of being arbitrary. It really is very exact, and dynamic. Much like an intelligence, if you will, though I would never have jumped to that analogy.

I'm a Buddhist, and I see the universe as a living being. So, it wasn't a big leap for me. 😉

Buddhism, eh? As an agnostic, it's one of the few religions that appeals to me. I digress, however.

@EmperorAshtar: I'm sort of curious. Can you explain your reason on why an intelligence would produce heterogeneity as opposed to homogeneity?

Originally posted by Ymir
Buddhism, eh? As an agnostic, it's one of the few religions that appeals to me. I digress, however.

@EmperorAshtar: I'm sort of curious. Can you explain your reason on why an intelligence would produce heterogeneity as opposed to homogeneity?

I don't understand the bulk of your question. Are you asking me to explain why Artificial Selection is better at bringing variation of species?

In my society, there will be no evolution. In my society, there will be total harmony with god and new species will STOP IT!

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
I don't understand the bulk of your question. Are you asking me to explain why Artificial Selection is better at bringing variation of species?

Yep. I'm just wondering. I would think that the interaction between environment and organism would be more dynamic, but I always try to keep an open mind.

Originally posted by Ymir
Yep. I'm just wondering. I would think that the interaction between environment and organism would be more dynamic, but I always try to keep an open mind.

That is because change doesn't happen, in nature, unless it is needed. Nature is lazy. 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is because change doesn't happen, in nature, unless it is needed. Nature is lazy. 😆

Ah, so the intelligence is fickle, as compared to nature which tries to keep everything on a 'necessary only' basis.

I dunno. I always liked all my M&Ms green when I was a kid. 😄

Originally posted by Ymir
Yep. I'm just wondering. I would think that the interaction between environment and organism would be more dynamic, but I always try to keep an open mind.

Natural Selection selects Traits at Random , But Artificial Selection does not. Fairly simple, compare the variation of Wolf/Dog in the Wild versus in captivity. The former is much more diverse than the later.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Natural Selection selects Traits at Random , But Artificial Selection does not. Fairly simple, compare the variation of Wolf/Dog in the Wild versus in captivity. The former is much more diverse than the later.

I don't believe in random or chance. Cause and effect rules all.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Natural Selection selects Traits at Random , But Artificial Selection does not. Fairly simple, compare the variation of Wolf/Dog in the Wild versus in captivity. The former is much more diverse than the later.

The later? As in the wild dog? There is remarkably little variation in wild dogs from one species to the next.

Is this all a shot at justifying Intelligent Design?

Originally posted by Devil King
The later? As in the wild dog? There is remarkably little variation in wild dogs from one species to the next.

Is this all a shot at justifying Intelligent Design?

No, I mean't there is more varitation in a domesticated dogs versus in the wild, my bad.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Natural Selection selects Traits at Random , But Artificial Selection does not. Fairly simple, compare the variation of Wolf/Dog in the Wild versus in captivity. The former is much more diverse than the later.

Clif Clavin style...

"Well ya see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back, that are killed first This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."

Natural selection isn't necessarily random and it is brought on by need to survive.

Originally posted by Robtard
Clif Clavin style...

"Well ya see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back, that are killed first This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."

Natural selection isn't necessarily random and it is brought on by need to survive.

I will have to have a couple of beers and then read this post again. 😆

Originally posted by Robtard
Clif Clavin style...

"Well ya see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back, that are killed first This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."

Natural selection isn't necessarily random and it is brought on by need to survive.

😆 My mom sent me that a few days ago.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Natural Selection selects Traits at Random

ARE YOU KIDDING?

Natural selection operates wholistically on any trait that influences an animals fitness. It is not random AT ALL.

Artificial selection acts on arbitrary, usually physical characteristics selected by man without any knowledge of what other traits are incidentally being selected for.

Originally posted by Alliance
ARE YOU KIDDING?

Natural selection operates wholistically on any trait that influences an animals fitness. It is not random AT ALL.

The Traits are selected in relation to whatever phenomenon that effects species survival. I see what your saying, but it's ultimately random.

Originally posted by Alliance

without any knowledge of what other traits are incidentally being selected for.

The context your putting this seems to imply that you believe Mother Nature has the knowledge of what other traits are incidentally being selected for.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
The Traits are selected in relation to whatever phenomenon that effects species survival. I see what your saying, but it's ultimately random.

No, ultimately its decided by the selection pressures dictated by the environment. Thats not random at all, its contextual.

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
The context your putting this seems to imply that you believe Mother Nature has the knowledge of what other traits are incidentally being selected for.

Yeah, right. I was talking about artifical selections...and linked traits can be selected for together, but in artifical selection, one can override species survival. natural selection will try to balance.