Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,860 Year: 4,117/9,624 Month: 988/974 Week: 315/286 Day: 36/40 Hour: 2/6


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Biological Evolution ⇒

Can sense organs like the eye really evolve?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can sense organs like the eye really evolve?
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 27 of 242 (636499)
10-07-2011 12:45 AM 		Reply to: Message 26 by Robert Byers
10-06-2011 11:51 PM

Robert Byers writes:
​
There is not diversity whatsoever relative to the number of creatures.
If so list the type of eyes in your local zoo.
How many would I have to list to show that there is a sufficient diversity?
​
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
​
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Robert Byers, posted 10-06-2011 11:51 PM Robert Byers has not replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 167 of 242 (638778)
10-25-2011 5:51 PM 		Reply to: Message 166 by 1.61803
10-25-2011 5:24 PM

Re: Cameras and Eyes
~2 writes:
​
However I'll play along, can a camera do all the things a eye can do with no one there to build it or power it, program it and operate it?
Well, let's find out shall we?
Put a cow's eye on your dining-room table and then describe what it can do.
Then we can see what an eye can do with no-one there to power it, program it or operate it.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2011 5:24 PM 1.61803 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2011 5:57 PM Panda has replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 169 of 242 (638782)
10-25-2011 6:15 PM 		Reply to: Message 168 by 1.61803
10-25-2011 5:57 PM

Re: Cameras and Eyes
~2 writes:
​
Hi Panda, Separating the eye from the body as you know renders it inoperable. It is built to operate as a contiguous unit and therefore your argument is empty imo.
So, your argument is that a human is better than a camera?
Well, that is nice goal-post moving.
​
But going back to the comparison we were making: a camera is better than an eye.
To answer your 'adjusted' comparison: a camera used by a human is better than an eye used by a human.
​
You have decided that an eye connected to a living human brain is analogous to a camera, but that is not correct.
It is a False Analogy.
​
~2 writes:
​
I can just as easily turn your own statement around and say take a SLR lense from its body and see what it can do.
An eye is not equivalent to the lens in a camera.
An eye is equivalent to the whole camera.
​
An eye connected to a human is not equivalent to a camera.
An eye connected to a human is equivalent to a camera connected to a human.
​
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
​
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2011 5:57 PM 1.61803 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2011 8:06 PM Panda has replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 173 of 242 (638795)
10-25-2011 8:52 PM 		Reply to: Message 172 by 1.61803
10-25-2011 8:06 PM

Re: Cameras and Eyes
~2 writes:
​
an eye is equalvalent to a camera? Nope this is the false analogy because from the start your equating a fully funtioning camera to a eye that is incomplete. Lacking it's needed vasculature, nerves, sensory inputs, etc..
False.
I equate a fully functioning camera to a fully functioning eye.
I have not excluded its vasculature, nerves or sensory inputs, as you will see if you read my previous posts.
​
What you are trying to do is argue that an eye (including the human that uses it) is better than a camera (excluding the human that uses it).
Why include the human element for the eye but exclude the human element for the camera?
By ignoring aspects which the camera clearly shares with the eye, you are creating a invalid comparison.
​
A fully functioning camera (used by a human) is equivalent to a fully functioning eye (used by a human).
A fully functioning camera (used by a human) is better than a fully functioning eye (used by a human).
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by 1.61803, posted 10-25-2011 8:06 PM 1.61803 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by 1.61803, posted 10-26-2011 11:09 AM Panda has not replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 213 of 242 (639304)
10-30-2011 8:03 AM 		Reply to: Message 211 by Portillo
10-30-2011 2:06 AM

Portillo writes:
​
Silly fantasy indeed. Maybe the ancestors were not fossilized, even though there are billions of fossils. The tree of life that is common to textbooks is actually drawn by the evolutionist. All you have are the leaves, the tree doesnt exist in nature.
Is this meant to be an apology for quote-mining Stephen Jay Gould?
Could you perhaps be honest and admit that your claim regarding Steven Gould was wrong?
​
And then could you support your statement that "The cambrian explosion proves that animals appear suddenly and fully formed", because Stephen Gould clearly does not support your claim.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Portillo, posted 10-30-2011 2:06 AM Portillo has not replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display

(4)
Message 221 of 242 (639582)
11-02-2011 6:47 AM 		Reply to: Message 220 by Portillo
11-02-2011 5:25 AM

Portillo writes:
​
Many species were bigger in size in the past and there is variation within fundamentally stable species. But no visible step by step development of earlier forms. This isnt crazy creationism, but is scientifically and positively documented. "The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition, and hence offers no evidence that the gradualistic model can be valid." - Steven M Stanley, Macroevolution: Pattern and Process
Sorry to pop your balloon, Portillo - but that is a well documented quote-mine. It is a 'crazy creationism' lie.
The Quote Mine Project (Or, Lies, Damned Lies and Quote Mines)
Scoll down to "Quote #3.11"...
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Portillo, posted 11-02-2011 5:25 AM Portillo has not replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 233 of 242 (641036)
11-15-2011 5:59 PM 		Reply to: Message 232 by Granny Magda
11-15-2011 4:38 PM

Re: Expectations
GM writes:
​
I can't think of any illustrative examples off hand, because we so rarely get asked this kind of question on these forums. In theory though, should this happen, you could just show them the evidence.
I think the 'whale evolution' thread would probably count. (Sorry, CBA to find a link to it.)
But it was a notably unique thread.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Granny Magda, posted 11-15-2011 4:38 PM Granny Magda has not replied
  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 235 of 242 (641239)
11-18-2011 5:44 AM 		Reply to: Message 234 by Portillo
11-18-2011 4:21 AM

Re: Eyes, Remember?
Responding to Granny Magda's Message 230 would have been far more constructive.
If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Portillo, posted 11-18-2011 4:21 AM Portillo has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024