[BreakBeatPoet]

How is there design without intelligence? Designs only happen if something intelligent designed them. If they "just happened", they are not designs.

So you say they just happen?

Yes. Random mutations happen all the time. If they are beneficial to the species, they are inherited by subsequent generations. If they are detrimental to the species, they are much less likely to be inherited.

Adaptation is largely a process of trial an error. It may be a bit crude, but it's highly effective.

The "design" if you like, is for living organisms to continually experiment with random small changes. The environment determines if those changes are for the good or not.

Trial and Error? How could something that does not "have" a "master plan" try or fail at something? If by "Error" you mean that the species dies off, may I remind you that everything dies at some point. Who's to know to keep track of the cause of death? How is it determined that a genetic mutation was or wasn't beneficial to a certain specimen, or even an entire species? and if this is determined at all, where is the information preserved?

Besides.. if the point of evolution is to progress a species further, it must be progressing towards something. Otherwise, progression would not exist.

I'm not saying there has to be a master plan.. I'm saying that at this stage in human evolution, it should appear to all of us that there is no other option. However, (there are humorous, obviously human-created, ideas for intelligent design(ie. religions)) and loads of other external (human created) stimuli that causes humans as a whole to view things in a very closed-minded way. I fear we have evolved so far in the wrong direction by misusing our intelligence, that we are likely not going to get back on track for hundreds of thousands of years if at all. The whole point of our species is to survive, yet we still exterminate each other. I know that the reasons for this are very deep and varied, which is why I mentioned that we have evolved to accept "that's just how it always has been and always will be" which is disappointing to say the least. We're talking about our species as a whole probably being a failure... Perhaps frogs will take our place once we have blown each other up lol.

 Though by the obvious complexity of nature.. I wouldn't be surprised if everything on Earth were to exist only to serve humans just to be able to create weapons to blow up the Earth itself killing everything on it just so a piece of rock can shoot out from the Earth into space colliding with another by passing asteroid just to slightly change it's direction(for whatever reason). This may sound unlikely, but at this point, it is just as likely and unlikely to us as every other theory.

 But It is most likely something we cannot fully comprehend with the limited brain power our species currently possess. We assume it's "intelligence" simply because we have no other way of wording it. Humans are "intelligent"- we are conscious and aware and we have the ability to think and create ideas and make things... so we personify what we can't understand and say that since everything is here, it had to be made by something, and if it was made, then it had to be by some sort of "intelligence".

Considering all the infinite amount of other possibilities, I should assume that the chances of everything being the result of another "being" or intelligent designer are incorrect.

I have many theories and I would love to believe them all, but then I remember that I'm probably incorrect and will also probably never find the answer. But like the Yucca Moth, I must do what my INSTINCT tells me- think, explore, and expand my knowledge..even though I may never see the results.

If evolution is random, why are we able to explain it?
If it can be explained, it is not random. By the way, I believe there is no such thing as "random."

And to add to the OP's topic.. Think about how wings for animals and insects were developed in the first place.. How did evolution learn air molecules could be manipulated? How do strawberries "know" they will be eaten so that their seeds are distributed in animal sh1t(let alone, how are they developed to withstand stomach acid...or that there are beings with stomachs that eat)?

How do dandelions know to use the wind to their advantage to spread their seeds?

Everyone who brushes these clues of nature off as "that's just how it is" has a lot of learning to do.
Nothing exists because that's is "just how it is". Take your heads out of the box, and try to look at the big picture... and I'm not talking about the big picture everyone looks at. Think of you're own "Big Picture"..There are so, so many things that we don't know and have not discovered.. The only thing we can do in our search for explanations is allow room for all the potential variables of undiscovered things in our theory results. This leads to an unlimited number of theories. Which is a good thing, cause as they say if everyone's thinking the same thing, someone is not thinking.

If you break it down to main points and byproducts of that point... Everything becomes a byproduct of something else.. continuing back until you have the beginning of time..but then is that a byproduct of something? Theoretically, everything should be a byproduct of one thing.. that One thing is the answer.

My personal favorite theory- Life(and everything) is a result of the most beautiful fractal "equation". How it was created or why it exists is open for discussion, but I feel this can explain the conservation of information theory, and how "instinct" exists. This means that to me, God is, and is in Everything.

[Geezer]

By the way, I believe there is no such thing as "random."

That's strange, because it struck me that your post might just be a collection of random thoughts.  []

Anyway, can you back any of this up with scientific evidence?

[BreakBeatPoet]

That's strange, because it struck me that your post might just be a collection of random thoughts.  []

Anyway, can you back any of this up with scientific evidence?

Yes, indeed it WAS a collection of seemingly-random thoughts. Was just surfin the forums and thought I'd add in my 2 cents -which turned out to be closer to a few bucks. lol I do apologize for my disorganization, though.. And as far as scientific evidence... which part? Most of it is abstract thought about what shouldn't be abstract. Again, I just wanted to lay down my own opinion. What do you think?

[Ophiolite]

Besides.. if the point of evolution is to progress a species further, it must be progressing towards something. Otherwise, progression would not exist.

Evolution does not have a point. what makes you think it does?

[BreakBeatPoet]

Evolution does not have a point. what makes you think it does?

Why else would it exist? Progression/improvement would not occur if there was no reason for it. We see the small scale of it's purpose as being "species survival" but why must a species survive? What is the large scale purpose for evolution?

The logic behind my thinking is that since nature is obviously continually "improving" itself through evolution, nature must be considered a progressing entity. And progress of any kind cannot occur without a beginning AND an end or "goal". (that goal may be to infinitely improve or arrange itself, but it is still a goal). The need for an end for progression to exist is why I believe that nature must have a point or goal for evolution.

[BenV]

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. It's not at all logical to assume that because there is improvement, it is for a reason. A very basic understanding of the process of evolution would show you that this is not the case.

[BreakBeatPoet]

Do not be sorry! Disagreement is good! It helps us learn. What I'm saying is I don't think a basic understanding of evolution yet exists. I believe we have but scratched the surface of that process. But explain to me how you can have improvement without having a purpose for improvement?

[BenV]

The "improvement" is merely a result of the process.  But a basic understanding of the process is enough - things that are better suited are more likely to survive and pass their "better suited-ness" on to the next generation.  Therefore the next generation is, on average, better suited to it's environment.  No aims, no goals, no intention.

[Ophiolite]

Evolution does not have a point. what makes you think it does?

Why else would it exist?

What is the purpose of gravity? What is it for?
Why does hydrogen combine so readily with oxygen? What is the purpose of that?
Why does the universe create heirarchical structures? What is its purpose?

 

Progression/improvement would not occur if there was no reason for it.

1. What makes you think the evolution of eukaryotes constituted an improvent? Why do you beleive that the emegence of intelligence was progress?
2. Do you insist that the progress from an amorphous gas/dust cloud to an ordered suite of star, planets and attendant bodies had a reason?

We see the small scale of it's purpose as being "species survival" but why must a species survive? 

Why must a stone fall to ground? Why must hydrogen atoms combine, under the right conditions, to form helium? Why do the right conditions exist? Surely they must exist for a reason?
[/quote]There isn't one.

The logic behind my thinking is that since nature is obviously continually "improving" itself through evolution, nature must be considered a progressing entity.

Breaking news: Nature's peak of progress and acme of improvement is currently in the process of destroying much of the diversity painstakingly built up over millions of years. Is this a normal practice for a progressive entity?

[BigBuddha]

I have read most of the replies in this post. That being said my added voice will most likely be drowned out sheer magnitude of replies. However since the discussion has devolved into an evolution vs. design debate I would like to add my two cents.

First cent. I think that the first thing that must be proven is can there be both evolution and intelligent design or must it be one or the other. Through my admittedly humble education - mostly self taught - I have never found a single case of intelligent design, including the examples here. Which I will debunk in part two. that cannot be explained by long slow evolution. Evolution on the other hand is not only evident but faster than many believe. Take the humans for example. The advent of glasses and laser eye surgery has eliminated natural selection of the poor sighted as a result the numbers of poor sighted humans are growing astronomically. Women will mate with nearly blind men and produce nearly blind babies. Who throughout most of the world would have died or at least not propagated as little as 400 years ago. Then there are dogs. Forced evolution by breeding all manner of oddities have been created just by selective breeding.

Second cent. In the originating post the possibility of co-evolution was discarded off-hand. That is what I find absurd. It must seem illogical to you because as a creationist your mind does not allow for a timeline so vast that the human mind can scarcely fathom it much less practically apply it to a theory. The very small blip of one million years is so long it defies understanding and could create a great many changes in a single species series until it settles into something that lasts for a few thousand years. Long enough that the miracle that is fossilization might catch a few and give us a snapshot of a species. Most species are never fossilized so quoting the absence of a species fossil is scientific folly. Yet species evolution often spans Hundreds of millions of years and the variations and details of evolution could account for every example given here and so much more. The whale with legs was given as a counter example and then discounted as being the possible result of human pollution. I would say that is how evolution works. A pollutant or is introduced, some animals develop genetic anomalies those that help survive and thrive those that don't eventually die off. If in a few thousand years the whales start leaving the polluted water on their legs then evolution has done its job. Evolution is not always fast enough which is why there are no dinosaurs anymore. 

Lastly. I am very dissappointed I was really hoping to read about some brain scans and behavioral analysis. Some real in depth studies on what is passed down from generation to generation. Answers to questions like "are new things added or lost generationally? If so, How? Why?" You know science.

[Ophiolite]

First cent. I think that the first thing that must be proven is can there be both evolution and intelligent design or must it be one or the other.

Your subsequent argument proves nothing. You assert that evolution has been observed. This is true. You assert that intelligent design has not been observed by you. It does not logically follow that you have demonstrated that evolution and intelligent design cannot co-exist.

A suggestion: don't talk of proof. Science does not generally deal in proof.

Second cent. In the originating post the possibility of co-evolution was discarded off-hand. That is what I find absurd. It must seem illogical to you because as a creationist your mind does not allow for a timeline so vast that the human mind can scarcely fathom it much less practically apply it to a theory.

The OPs objections appears to be that there is no obvious reason for instinct to evolve, not that there is insufficient time for this to occur.

Side comment: you overestimate the role of "pollution" in generating diversity. While "pollutants" do induce mutations in the germ cells, most mutations are a consequence of "chance".