|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,435 Year: 3,692/9,624 Month: 563/974 Week: 176/276 Day: 16/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Can sense organs like the eye really evolve? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Whether you believe in evolution or not, evolutionary understanding has not advanced the cause of correcting defective vision.
The new advances such as laser surgery for correcting detached retinas and for correcting vision are all human designed advancements negating any future evolutionary changes. Humans have therefore reached a point where we can control our own evolutionary destiny. Therefore even if no intelligent design was occuring before it certainly is now through human intervention. If human beings are a force that can affectively defeat natural selection then I can only imagine that other such influences also exist.Evolution has in essence evolved its way out of existence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: But that would cause the accumulation of inferior genes, which is something we wouldn't want. Our influence on our "evolutionary destiny" by "defeating natural selection" is the exact opposite of what we'd want for our species, so by "defeating natural selection" we are not so much "controlling our evolutionary destiny" as fucking it up. Some might agree with you that we do not want people with bad eyesight to pass on their genes. Eugenicists I think would be the term. The price of glasses and the cost of lasik eye surgery is further evidence that you are indeed right that we don't want these underlings to procreate. But some evidence points in the other direction. Eyesight appears to be getting worse in the modern generation and we are indeed encouraging those who can afford the costs to go ahead and litter our schools with four eyed runts who can further dirty our shrinking gene pool. As you say this is not design as such but it is intervention.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Theodoric writes: But alas, you provide no evidence. You claim there is some evidence, would you care to share it with us so we can decide whether it is meaningful evidence or not. Not sure why I am bothering to provide this evidence. If you agree with the evidence then what does that mean? And if you don't so what?
Dietary Causes of Myopia (Short Sightedness) Information
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: I am opposed to any compulsory program of eugenics. Can I take it that you would be happy with a voluntary program of eugenics then?
Dr Adequate writes:
Can I further assume that you will not be exercising your own volition for this voluntary eugenics program that you espouse?
And the fact is that providing me with glasses and not sterilizing me will work contrary to that goal. Dr Adequate writes:
This is in direct opposition to your previous offering that if evolution has taught us one thing it is that biodiversity is advantageous and should be maintained.
But it is still true that such policies will thwart natural selection by producing future generations with poorer eyesight.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
How would one oppose a voluntary program of eugenics?
I am willing to accept you wouldn't oppose a voluntary program of eugenics but would you encourage a voluntary program of eugenics?You have already indicated that bad eyesight is a trait that you would personally like to see decline in future generations. Fortunately, as your antieugenic inquisition does not exist, I am under no obligation to explain to you or anyone else how many children I want and why.
You have already said that you like being able to see and you like having testicles. You have therefore opted out of this voluntary program if it ever existed.
That was in fact posted by someone else, namely Taq in message #98.
But his point is a valid one don't you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Nuggin writes: I'm not advocating killing or even sterilizing people. I am saying that just like "don't smoke" and "don't litter" campaigns have changed the national trends, we can have a "don't have kids if you have a bad genetic disease" campaign. Ahhh...here is someone who is willing to "encourage a voluntary eugenics program". I am not saying that this is right or wrong. Eugenics however, has been touted and rejected in previous generations but I can see that its appeal lives on. If allowed to catch hold of the public imagination it would be a force for intelligent design don't you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Nugget writes: I certainly believe that eugenics would be a creative way to rid us of the people who believe in Intelligent Design. Evolutionary tautology noted. You wish to eradicate belief in intelligent design through the implementation of an intelligent design concept.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
And in other respects, the eye is inferior to a camera. For a start, my camera can focus. My eyes can't and need corrective lenses. I can't easily change the lenses on my eyes as I might on a camera, or add a zoom (that last one is particularly annoying when I'm out birdwatching). Also, not wishing to state the obvious, I can't take snapshots with my eyes, print them out and bore my friends with them. My camera is attached to an "information processing system" though;it has a tiny computer inside it. Firstly I disagree, your eye can focus (chances are you're long or short sighted) but your focal range might be very limited. Also your eye can still focus with corrective lenses just like your camera.Secondly, I can't change the lens on my camera either as it is a point and click type so no different to an eye. Your eye can also record some details of an instant in time (ie a snapshot) but it does so through a sytem called memory rather than through film or a digital format. A far more eco friendly system don't you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
A very different system. Memories are famously prone to error. If you remembered wearing a blue jacket at your last birthday party, but I show you a photo of you, at the party, wearing a black jacket, which would you trust? The photo or your memory? Did you use photoshop? I could have sworn that I was wearing a blue jacket (infact I don't even have black one) on my birthday.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
Eyes do not have flash so they cant make a picture in pich darkness True but every time I blink I don't see every human being having the exact same colour eyes ie red.
Eyes cant zoom. Many cameras only come with digital zoom which is practically worthless. And if you have a camera like mine which has zoom but no optical image stabilisation be prepared for snaps which you daren't share with either friends or family.
The 50 year old camera i have still works like the day it was bought. Funny but my five year old camera is already losing pixels in every frame. Five years is not a long time.
Eyes dont have factory testing some are just broken the day you get them (birth) where every camera has a warranty. Yeah but when you exercise your warranty you have to hand over your camera to a third party. He may return the item back to you in worse shape than when you gave it to him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big_Al35 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 389 Joined: |
I dunno bout eyes but I'm here testing my new iPad. Hope I can post stuff.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024