How does "instinct" evolve?

  • 270 Replies
  • 150835 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #50 on: 14/09/2008 14:53:38 »
Quote
If it takes 33,127 generations NOT to produce a single new species of relatively uncomplicated bacteria, then how many generations does it take to produce a whale from a Pakicetus? Not to mention the 6 - 8,000,000 species in the Cambrian from nowhere, it seems.
Ever heard of a little thing called SEXUAL REPRODUCTION?
Species can develop at a fantastically quicker rate this way than the poor old trial and error  Asexual variety. The results of  mutation are constantly being injected into the gene pool and 'come out' if and when they prove to be an advantage.
To enable yourself to grasp the probabilities involved you need to be aware of the actual numbers - they are huge.

*

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1503
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #51 on: 14/09/2008 14:59:02 »
I think you've misunderstood (Asyncritus, not sophie).  The birds with longer beaks were more likely to breed - so in the population as a whole the 2nd generation were more likely to have longer beaks.  Of generation 2, those with the longest beaks were the most likely to breed, so longer beaks again would be more common in generation 3 and so on.

Blakestyger was not suggesting that acquired characteristics were inherited.

We know that genetic mutations, deletions, translations, substitutions etc happen, and this is how we get new genes - so the genes for a long beak came from these processes.

And although Flyberius has been forward in his opinions, bordering on being rude, he's entitled to his opinions. Religion inspires strong feelings in people, both for and against.

Flyberius - please try to be a little more tactful, thanks.

*

Offline Flyberius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #52 on: 14/09/2008 15:13:21 »
Flyberius - please try to be a little more tactful, thanks.

Sorry, I know I rarely contribute to these arguments and what I do say is usually anti-god and very offensive. 

Tough love.

*

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8169
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #53 on: 14/09/2008 15:48:07 »
Quote
Charles Darwin to receive apology from the Church of England for rejecting evolution

The Church of England is to apologise to Charles Darwin for its initial rejection of his theories,
nearly 150 years after he published his most famous work.
 
By Jonathan Wynne-Jones, Religious Affairs Correspondent      14 Sep 2008

www.telegraph.co.uk

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #54 on: 15/09/2008 08:34:41 »
Asyncritus, your definition of evolution is equivalent to saying that centimetres can't add up to kilometres. Genotypes and phenotypes don't just jump from one form into another like magic. There is a gradual accumulation of changes. These changes are evolution in action.

Of course, you reject despite the evidence that there are beneficial mutations that natural selection can act on, as you demonstrated with the E. coli experiment and the hypothetical beak lengthening.

It's unfortunate that you would rather pursue your ideology than actually understand the science. Please come back when you have done so. (There's no way you can come back with your current opinion after actually understanding the science. Please do us and yourself the favor). 
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

blakestyger

  • Guest
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #55 on: 15/09/2008 09:21:11 »
1. The genes for long beak ARE ALREADY THERE.

2. If they got longer by practice (ho ho!) then the longer beak CANNOT BE PASSED DOWN, because ACQUIRED CHARACTERISTICS CANNOT BE INHERITED!!!!!

So you have a lickle problem there, haven't you?  [::)]

Asyncritus - you really haven't understood a thing, have you?

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #56 on: 15/09/2008 09:48:22 »
Quote
If it takes 33,127 generations NOT to produce a single new species of relatively uncomplicated bacteria, then how many generations does it take to produce a whale from a Pakicetus? Not to mention the 6 - 8,000,000 species in the Cambrian from nowhere, it seems.
Ever heard of a little thing called SEXUAL REPRODUCTION?
Species can develop at a fantastically quicker rate this way than the poor old trial and error  Asexual variety. The results of  mutation are constantly being injected into the gene pool and 'come out' if and when they prove to be an advantage.
To enable yourself to grasp the probabilities involved you need to be aware of the actual numbers - they are huge.

Sophie

There is not a single case on record where you can point to a new species emerging either slowly or at once in the literature today.

I showed you the 33,127 generations didn't do it in Lenski's experiment. How many more do you need? I don't call that 'fantastically quickly', do you?

If a human generation is 14 years (to reach sexual maturity) then that's 33,127 x 14 = 464,000 years for NO new species to evolve. Tough luck!
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1503
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #57 on: 15/09/2008 11:30:59 »
Dont forget that conditions were not changed in Lenski's experiment - had he started with one population, split it in two and subjected the subsequent generations to different selection pressures (different temperatures, type/amount of food etc) then you would have seen much quicker selection, and greater variation.  Even with no change in conditions, the bacteria evolved to be bigger and better able to compete.

You can't escape Lenski's observations, and you are choosing to ignore that bacteria reproduce asexually, thus greatly limiting the genetic variation from one generation to the next. Sexual reproduction recombines genes each generation, thus leading to much, much quicker variation.

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #58 on: 15/09/2008 15:58:40 »
ignorance is not a proof, so again...
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html#part5


And I already explained the "Race circle" to you in the other Thread... there are some of them you can observe today, that show pretty good how Evolution could work.. I gave you the Example of the great tit in Europe, these salamanders at the end of the quote are another one..

Quote
2) Reproductive isolation evolves gradually: species distinctions somewhat arbitrary
      Rassenkreis  (''race circle'): a geographically convergent series of species
        Ex.  Ensatina salamanders (Anura) are continuously distributed in California
              adjacent forms are reproductively compatible & morphologically similar
              ends of circle are reproductively isolated & morphologically distinct
(http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/2900_Species.htm)

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #59 on: 16/09/2008 11:34:55 »
The talkorigins article is a messy collection , mainly of polyploidy, and of very badly treated animals in some monster's laboratory.

And another point - these new'species' never leave the genus. So we've got a few miserable examples of species alterations, and 6,000,000 living species to account for. How do you square that numerical circle?

There is no example of new species arising in the wild where all this would have happened n million years ago.

I am horrified to read some of the quite monstrous experiments they performed to 'produce' these brutalised 'new species'. Have you read what they actually did? No, I didn't think so.

But I do want to say that these 'new species' are artificially produced for the most part, and cruelly for the rest.
« Last Edit: 16/09/2008 11:40:59 by Asyncritus »
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #60 on: 16/09/2008 11:37:09 »
1. The genes for long beak ARE ALREADY THERE.

2. If they got longer by practice (ho ho!) then the longer beak CANNOT BE PASSED DOWN, because ACQUIRED CHARACTERISTICS CANNOT BE INHERITED!!!!!

So you have a lickle problem there, haven't you?  [::)]

Asyncritus - you really haven't understood a thing, have you?

Oh yes I have.

1 I understand that acquired characteristics CAN'T be inherited and

2 I understand that beneficial mutations occur so rarely that they cannot possibly have produced the 6,000,000 species alive today from any common ancestor(s).

So what do you think of that, then?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #61 on: 16/09/2008 11:40:28 »
There is no example of new species arising in the wild where all this would have happened n million years ago.

And I already explained the "Race circle" to you in the other Thread... there are some of them you can observe today, that show pretty good how Evolution could work.. I gave you the Example of the great tit in Europe, these salamanders at the end of the quote are another one..

Quote
2) Reproductive isolation evolves gradually: species distinctions somewhat arbitrary
      Rassenkreis  (''race circle'): a geographically convergent series of species
        Ex.  Ensatina salamanders (Anura) are continuously distributed in California
              adjacent forms are reproductively compatible & morphologically similar
              ends of circle are reproductively isolated & morphologically distinct
(http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/2900_Species.htm)

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #62 on: 16/09/2008 11:44:26 »
There is no example of new species arising in the wild where all this would have happened n million years ago.

And I already explained the "Race circle" to you in the other Thread... there are some of them you can observe today, that show pretty good how Evolution could work.. I gave you the Example of the great tit in Europe, these salamanders at the end of the quote are another one..

Ut the salamander is a living fossil. I gave you the reference, so you know it.

Quote
2) Reproductive isolation evolves gradually: species distinctions somewhat arbitrary
      Rassenkreis
  (''race circle'): a geographically convergent series of species
        Ex.  Ensatina salamanders (Anura) are continuously distributed in California
              adjacent forms are reproductively compatible & morphologically similar
              ends of circle are reproductively isolated & morphologically distinct
(http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/2900_Species.htm)

And have we got a single nice new genus with all these species? No, we don't. And what about these 6,000, 000 species today then? Where did they come from????
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

blakestyger

  • Guest
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #63 on: 16/09/2008 13:56:17 »
So what do you think of that, then?

I think that as we both come from opposite paradigms no meaningful discussion can take place between us.
For what it's worth, a careful reading of Life, An Authorised Biography by Richard Fortey will prevent you from having to defend this hopeless position you have chosen - good luck.
« Last Edit: 16/09/2008 14:00:02 by blakestyger »

*

lyner

  • Guest
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #64 on: 16/09/2008 15:34:48 »
Quote
I showed you the 33,127 generations didn't do it in Lenski's experiment. How many more do you need? I don't call that 'fantastically quickly', do you?

If a human generation is 14 years (to reach sexual maturity) then that's 33,127 x 14 = 464,000 years for NO new species to evolve. Tough luck!

I thought bacteria reproduce asexually. Did you not understand the relevance of sexual reproduction and the consequent change in time scale for evolution?

You say there is no evidence for new species - aren't the museums full of them? Doesn't the DNA analysis of long dead organisms reveal it?

You obviously have a 'faith' issue here. Try to concentrate on evidence if you want to talk about Science. Religion and Science don't have to be mutually exclusive, you know. Or are you going to join an Amish community? (Even they have come to terms with some of this new fangled modern Science.)

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #65 on: 25/09/2008 09:37:11 »
Hey Sophie

How did sexual reproduction evolve from asexual reproduction?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #66 on: 30/09/2008 00:50:49 »
oh my....
even some asexual individues change genetic materials from time to time ... if you finally understood the princibles of evolution, than there is no need to explain anything further...
otherwise Im just not willing to explain it again

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #67 on: 30/09/2008 08:52:13 »
Oh come on Atrox. Don't be so chicken.

All you have to do is show how a cell which is happily dividing into two every day of its life, can suddenly decide that

It's going to split its number of chromosomes into EXACTLY HALF.

Then each half is going to meet up with another one that's divided into EXACTLY HALF as well.

Then they are going to join up somehow.

Then the 2 HALF nuclei are going to join up and form the ORIGINAL whole number and live happily ever after.

Now that's not too difficult, is it? Heh heh.
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

blakestyger

  • Guest
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #68 on: 30/09/2008 11:18:42 »
Asyncritus

You've got some reading to do.  [::)]

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #69 on: 30/09/2008 14:01:35 »
... can suddenly decide that

suddenly? decide? ...I really wonder what idea of the theorie of evolution you have...apparantly not even close to the actual one...even after all these discussions now...

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #70 on: 30/09/2008 16:04:46 »



Quote
Asyncritus

You've got some reading to do.  roll eyes

Like what do you have in mind?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #71 on: 30/09/2008 16:15:06 »
... can suddenly decide that

suddenly? decide? ...I really wonder what idea of the theorie of evolution you have...apparantly not even close to the actual one...even after all these discussions now...


Come on atrox, don't be a spoilsport now.

Here's a little bacterial cell. It is dividing into two every 2 hours, asexually, and it can do that all year, no problem.

Over there is another organism. It doesn't divide into two.

It counts its chromosomes, finds 800. Now it sez to itself, hey sexual reproduction is a good thing.

So it divides its chromosomes into 400 in two new cells. Each one is going to die, because it's 400 short!

So it looks round, and hey presto, over there is another one with 400 chromosomes too. So it rushes over there, and heck, there's a big chemical wall preventing it from going in! So both die.

Now what happens? I dunno, but I could go on like this all day, making up stupid stories like this trying to figure out how it really happened.

Why not try it? It's good for a laugh if nothing else!

How about it Sophie?

Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #72 on: 01/10/2008 22:23:21 »
just read something about the reproductional cycle of plant lice ... maybe than you will understand, that there is no either...or in evolution. There are a lot of steps inbetween. No cell ever had to decide between reproducing sexual or nonsexual (and, btw, they never had to decide and surely not suddenly as you still try to imply!). The same way as no fish had to decide to stay in water or to go to the desert.. [::)]

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #73 on: 02/10/2008 11:24:17 »
Well, if they didn't decide, and they didn't do it suddenly, then how did fish get on to dry land?

Are they stupid, or what? Or did they tippy-toe out and dry out: AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!

And if they didn't decide to be sexual instead of asexual, why did one change into the other?

Nope. That didn't evolve, that's for sure.
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1503
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #74 on: 02/10/2008 12:18:00 »
You used to argue sensibly, but I fear you may have run out of reasonable comments.

Do you acknowledge that mudskippers exist?  So you are aware that some fish are perfectly capable of spending periods of time outside of the water.

You clearly need to read the 'evolution of sexual reproduction' thread again - it was explained perfectly well there, you presented your arguments and others refuted them.

*

Offline atrox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #75 on: 02/10/2008 14:07:29 »

Do you acknowledge that mudskippers exist? 

lol, yes she/he knows...but just ignores...as always ;-)
We had this discussion about fish going on land before (eels, lungfish, mudskipper), but of course thats no proof that sudden is not a word of a evolutionists vocabulary...  [;)]

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #76 on: 03/10/2008 01:16:50 »
Asyncritus, your posts just get inaner by the day. You continuously demonstrate profound ignorance of biology. If you wish to discuss these topics, you should at least understand what you're talking about first. There are so many resources available to you. Please stop wasting our time with your straw men.
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #77 on: 05/10/2008 00:07:56 »
You used to argue sensibly, but I fear you may have run out of reasonable comments.

Do you acknowledge that mudskippers exist?  So you are aware that some fish are perfectly capable of spending periods of time outside of the water.

You clearly need to read the 'evolution of sexual reproduction' thread again - it was explained perfectly well there, you presented your arguments and others refuted them.

I think you got that the wrong way round. Others presented arguments, and I refuted them!

Nobody has yet said anything of why or how asexual reproduction became sexual reproduction.

And don't tell me 'it's a good idea because...' I know it's a good idea. I want to know when asexual became sexual and why did the change take place?
« Last Edit: 05/10/2008 00:10:28 by Asyncritus »
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #78 on: 05/10/2008 06:42:28 »
Don't you have access to the trillions of other pages of the internet? You disregard every explanation you're given here, so why should we bother any more? 
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #79 on: 06/10/2008 02:31:46 »
Because unless you do, the readership will know that you have no explanation of this enormously important phenomenon.

Now you don't want that, do you?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #80 on: 06/10/2008 06:57:30 »
No, it will only read your self-imposed ignorance and die of laughter.

If they haven't already read the explanations provided by members of this forum and on the rest of the internet, they can ask genuinely for further clarifications and actually learn something when they are answered.
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #81 on: 08/10/2008 09:49:40 »
No, it will only read your self-imposed ignorance and die of laughter.

If they haven't already read the explanations provided by members of this forum and on the rest of the internet, they can ask genuinely for further clarifications and actually learn something when they are answered.

Stefan

The fact of the matter is that there are NONE on the internet, or in any textbook you can name.

Why is that?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #82 on: 09/10/2008 06:42:51 »
Asyncritus, lying does not make something true. Your post is a complete lie.

A Google search for "evolution of sexual reproduction", returns 566,000 results!

The argument from ignorance is not an effective argument. Lying is worse. If these are the only "tools" in your conceptual toolbox, you are intellectually bankrupt.
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #83 on: 09/10/2008 10:06:19 »
My apologies for my extreme statement. There ARE  a lot of papers. However,

You should try reading them with your common sense in gear, and not just your oesophagus.

Like the very first reference to wiki:

"The evolution of sexual reproduction is a major puzzle in modern evolutionary biology."

Did you get that? In simple terms, THEY DON'T KNOW!!!!!

Want more?

" Since we saw last week that group selection is unlikely, this hypothesis is NOT likely to explain the evolution of sexual reproduction."

THEY DON'T KNOW.

You guys have to get some critical faculties in gear. The brain, not the oesophagus, is the organ of thought.

I do apologise for my extreme statement that there is nothing about sexual reproduction's origin. The fact is that the papers I have read, say they don't have a clue, as above. So my substance was right. There's nothing about how sexual reproduction ACTUALLY AROSE. Note the word ACTUALLY. It means EVIDENCED material, not just silly guesses and hypotheses.

They say that they don't know, and that's fair enough.

But that puts the ball right back in your court. Account already.
« Last Edit: 09/10/2008 10:10:26 by Asyncritus »
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1503
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #84 on: 09/10/2008 11:02:41 »
Quote
You guys have to get some critical faculties in gear.

Okay then.  There is, and can never be, any evidence for the existence of god.  Thinking critically, I would be forced to reject god and accept that there is another explanation for life.  I would then have to consider something that is common to all life on earth - the fact that their biochemistry and physiology is controlled by nucleic acids...

Do you honestly think that you can ask other people to think critically, while telling them that god made everything?

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #85 on: 09/10/2008 12:42:42 »
I'm interested in why you are so adamant about not believing in God.

You obviously have some scientific training/knowledge, and I would have expected you to have a rather more open mind than you are exhibiting.

I can't show you a divine signature in every cell, but what would it take to reverse your opinion?
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1503
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #86 on: 09/10/2008 13:17:24 »
Good question.

The reason I have no belief in god is that I have never seen any evidence for a god, or any reason to think there may  be evidence for one.  There's no need for a god in my life, my moral guidance comes from my upbringing, and a sense of fairness and compassion instilled in me by my parents.  I have no fear of death, and so do not need to cling on the the idea of an afterlife.  I am responsible for my own actions, and do not need a deity from which to seek forgiveness.  I make my own decisions based on my personal responsibility and morals, and so do not seek guidance.  I am thankful for what I have, but it comes from the hard work and love of my parents, friends, family and myself, so need no deity to offer thanks to.

I am a reasonable person, and I understand enough about human nature and the nature of religion to understand that god, and religion, is a nothing more than a fable, a story to tell yourself to help tidy things away.

I am also an open minded person, which isn't to say I will believe anything I'm told.  Again, there is no evidence for a god, and would you expect an open minded person to believe in pixies?  I'm open minded, but also cynical - I will accept people's explanations and think them through, but I can also reject them when they are based on flawed assumptions or poor logic.

I guess the chief issue here is that we think in different paradigms.  I using reason and logic and you using religion.  This is why your comments get my back up on the forum, as you are attacking a reasoned argument from a non-reason point of view.  I wouldn't go to a religious forum to explain why I think they are all wrong, so why do you do so on a scientific forum?

What could make me believe in god? Evidence for it's existence - but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

What made you choose to believe in god?

*

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #87 on: 09/10/2008 18:05:32 »
Asyncritus, when you understand why you don't believe in the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster, then you will understand why we don't believe in (your, or anyone else's) gods.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8735
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #88 on: 09/10/2008 18:59:31 »
Slightly off topic but can someone tell me if asyncritus means someone permanently out of step?

And actually Asyncritus, it's you who has a problem.
"The genes for long beak ARE ALREADY THERE."
Yes, and evolution explicitly depends on variabillity. If the genetic variation were absent the evolutionists would have a problem. As things stand (ie in reality) they are fine.
"If they got longer by practice (ho ho!) then the longer beak CANNOT BE PASSED DOWN, because ACQUIRED CHARACTERISTICS CANNOT BE INHERITED!!!!!"
If they got longer by practice, this would have nothing to do with dawrinian evolution.On the other hand if those who happened to have longer beaks survived better then evolution would work just fine.


I often wonder how much of His time the creationist crowd think God must put into ensuring the evolution doesn't happen.

It seems to me that it's inevitable that more successful creatures will outbreed less successful ones. If there's any variability in a species (and there always is) it must change in response to its surroundings.
Does God nip round each night undoing evolution?
Surely He must have other things to do.
Either that or he deliberately cam up with a crap system




Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline ...lets split up...

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 102
  • I love lamp
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #89 on: 10/10/2008 12:03:19 »
I read a little of what you guys said. Personally i don't argue with creationists or synonyms thereof, it makes for too much frustration in my life, just leave them alone.

As for the meaning of life i heard mention of earlier. The definition for meaning:

1. what is intended to be, or actually is, expressed or indicated; signification; import: the three meanings of a word. 
2. the end, purpose, or significance of something: What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of this intrusion? 

You could say that we can't know the meaning of life as we are part of the process and grasping the meaning might alter the result. That's my 2 cents anyway.

Does this make sense?
« Last Edit: 10/10/2008 12:05:29 by ...lets split up... »
I love lamp

*

Offline Evie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 200
  • "Back off man...I'm a Scientist."
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #90 on: 10/10/2008 15:09:48 »
Quote
Slightly off topic but can someone tell me if asyncritus means someone permanently out of step?

I know you were probably kidding, but Asyncritus was an apostle (and saint), referenced by Paul. The name itself means "incomparable."

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Apostle_Asyncritus
====================================================
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Hamlet
Act I, scene 5

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
Re: How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #91 on: 10/10/2008 18:33:58 »
I read the name in Romans, liked it, and then found after I'd been using it for a while, that it meant incomparable. Wasn't deliberate choice with that in mind.
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline jespriell

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #92 on: 13/12/2008 05:54:56 »
I have a question, does the very act of selecting requires understanding?

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #93 on: 15/12/2008 11:51:03 »
What do you mean by that question? Could you please elaborate?
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline thelastman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 25
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #94 on: 15/12/2008 20:47:25 »
I'm surprised no one mentioned mathematics in all of that.  I know, differential equations are a bit intimidating but they open up a marvelous window into the workings of nature.  How did it all evolve?  I quote Rene' Thom:

"All creation or destruction of form or morphogenesis can be described by the disappearance of the attractor representing the initial form, and it's replacement by capture of the attractor representing the final form."

Change occurs through the underlying dynamics responsible for the change.  The dynamics gives rise to certain forms of structure one of which is an "attractor", a stable state the change tends to.  Surrounding attractors are regions called "basins of attraction" which if the dynamics happens to reach, is drawn into the attractor.  Outside this basin, the dynamics tends to other states some of which are non-stable causing the dynamics to simple fall apart.

How does the ameba, moth, and wasp know?  They don't know.  Rather all are part of dynamic systems which have been pushed into basins of attraction and have reached the attractor which is the phenomenon we perceive as the ameba engulfing food,  the reproductive cycles of the moth and wasp, the marvelous clay cathedral of the termites, and all the other wonderful forms in nature we see:  at it's most fundamental level, evolution is dynamics.

There is no designer creating these forms.  We are yet unable to fully appreciate the immense complexity of these dynamics, the long chain of events leading up to the attractors we observe, and wishing for a simple "human" explanation seek divine intervention.  I'm sorry people.  There is no God, no creator, rather only a fragile people still in many ways living in a demon-haunted world.
 

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #95 on: 16/12/2008 21:28:49 »
Quote
There is no designer creating these forms.  We are yet unable to fully appreciate the immense complexity of these dynamics, the long chain of events leading up to the attractors we observe, and wishing for a simple "human" explanation seek divine intervention.  I'm sorry people.  There is no God, no creator, rather only a fragile people still in many ways living in a demon-haunted world.

If you, as a rational human being, presumably with some intelligence at your disposal, can genuinely think this, then there's really no hope for rationality and intelligence. They are withered on the vine, and blasted by the east wind.

They are meaningless terms and should be abandoned immediately.
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline _Stefan_

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 814
    • View Profile
    • My Photobucket Album
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #96 on: 17/12/2008 02:18:50 »
Don't be a hypocrite, Asyncritus! Who designed the designer?

None of the evidence indicates that the universe was designed and has an intrinsic purpose or meaning. If you want to insist that there is, you must find positive evidence for your claim.

Your criticisms of evolution are invalid because they are based in ignorance, misunderstanding, and consist almost entirely of logical fallacies. Further, even if evolution was completely falsified, there would still be no case to be made for creationism as there is no positive evidence. You continue to ignore this major point.
Stefan
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." -David Hume

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #97 on: 18/12/2008 14:46:03 »
Don't be a hypocrite, Asyncritus! Who designed the designer?

None of the evidence indicates that the universe was designed and has an intrinsic purpose or meaning. If you want to insist that there is, you must find positive evidence for your claim.

Your criticisms of evolution are invalid because they are based in ignorance, misunderstanding, and consist almost entirely of logical fallacies. Further, even if evolution was completely falsified, there would still be no case to be made for creationism as there is no positive evidence. You continue to ignore this major point.

Don't you think this is somewhat irrational Stefan?

I've never met the designer of Mercedes cars, but I drive one.

Does that mean he doesn't exist? Or that Carl Benz is a figment of my imagination?

Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!

*

Offline LawOfBiogenesis

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #98 on: 18/12/2008 16:51:38 »
Asyncritus, why would a competent and careful designer put legs on a whale ?

The whale has no vestigial legs, they are not and never have been, connected to the skeleton of the whale. They are used for sexual reproduction, as grasping devices so the whales can copulate.

*

Offline Asyncritus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 235
    • View Profile
How does "instinct" evolve?
« Reply #99 on: 19/12/2008 01:15:11 »
Quote
The whale has no vestigial legs, they are not and never have been, connected to the skeleton of the whale. They are used for sexual reproduction, as grasping devices so the whales can copulate.

[^] [:)]
Remember, the organ of thought is the brain, not the oesophagus!