Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   bio evolution, light, sound and aroma
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 142 (716571)
01-19-2014 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Col2v8
01-18-2014 2:42 PM


ny explanation as to how biological evolution (natural selection) first 'knew' that there was such a thing as light in the universe,
Natural selection cannot "know" anything. Natural selection is simply the name given to the process whereby those most critters most likely to survive and reproduce like organisms end up constituting the population over time.
As for how senses developed, let's take hearing. Sound is simply a pressure wave oscillation transmitted to the atmosphere. Every organism, including those which are completely deaf, is sensitive to pressure of some magnitude. But those organisms with more sensitivity can determine more about their surroundings so that they are more likely to find food and avoid being eaten.
Assigning human characteristics to something you don't understand invariably leads to muddled thinking. In this case, goofy anthropomorphization seems to be the complete basis for even asking the question. Part of the process of evolution is the introduction of random variations. It turns out that random variation selected by natural processes can produce results of exactly the type you ask about here.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Col2v8, posted 01-18-2014 2:42 PM Col2v8 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 142 (716572)
01-19-2014 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Col2v8
01-18-2014 10:24 PM


Is there one definitive answer to what is 'Natural Selection'?
Those that are able to survive and breed become parents to the next generation. Sometimes characterized by "the survival of the fit enough" ... Again I recommend you read the Berkeley Evolution 101 site; there is a page there on natural selection:
Natural Selection - Understanding Evolution
If it doesn't literally know anything, how does it know how to select in a natural manner?
Perhaps the question has to be what is Natural? What is Selection?
Good questions to ask.
Darwin observed that more offspring were produced than were necessary to maintain the population, but that the populations did not increase in proportion, so therefore some survived and some did not survive.
Darwin also observed that some were better adapted to survive and reproduce than others.
As Dr A notes these observations lead to the conclusion that any advantage, no matter how slight, gives a higher probability of survival and breeding, and that over generations would lead to those traits that provide more advantage becoming common in the population.
The next question is where those variations in traits come from: what is the (natural) process that creates variation in breeding populations?
Edited by RAZD, : more

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Col2v8, posted 01-18-2014 10:24 PM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Col2v8
Junior Member (Idle past 3720 days)
Posts: 6
Joined: 01-17-2014


Message 18 of 142 (716574)
01-19-2014 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by jar
01-19-2014 9:17 AM


Re: Imagine
Well, if I were one who could see, then the survivors would be as many blind people as I could feed, and myself.
Is your logic here deeply disturbing or what? I may have missed your point; but my point is that the very reason we humans want to help is evidence against the blind-non-forward-thinking-planning, very nature, of evolution!
If evolution is completely indifferent to morality (indeed, it doesn't care that it doesn't even care) then why has it gone on produce creatures (us at least) that do!
Where would I (a machine for gene survival) ever get a notion in the first place to help, if the very giving of that help might infringe on my own gene survival. (blind people will eat MY food) - Maybe helping is a bad trait that will be worked out of human evolution, what a despicable thought! But evolutionary theory allows this to be a reasonable possibility!!!
My root position, is that life is given, and that evolution is a non-starter!
thanks for your post

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by jar, posted 01-19-2014 9:17 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 01-19-2014 9:49 AM Col2v8 has not replied
 Message 20 by Dogmafood, posted 01-19-2014 10:19 AM Col2v8 has not replied
 Message 21 by RAZD, posted 01-19-2014 10:22 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 19 of 142 (716576)
01-19-2014 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:44 AM


Re: Imagine
Well for this discussion you also have no means of feeding any others.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:44 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 20 of 142 (716578)
01-19-2014 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:44 AM


Re: Imagine
If evolution is completely indifferent to morality (indeed, it doesn't care that it doesn't even care) then why has it gone on produce creatures (us at least) that do!
Because helping others is beneficial to your own survival. Humans with a sense of empathy are more likely to survive than humans without one. Having survived they go on to make more humans with a sense of empathy. 2 million yrs later almost everyone has a tendency to be empathetic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:44 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 21 of 142 (716579)
01-19-2014 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:44 AM


opinion and reality
Well, if I were one who could see, then the survivors would be as many blind people as I could feed, and myself.
So you have a primary advantage and those close to you have a secondary advantage.
Is your logic here deeply disturbing or what? I may have missed your point; but my point is that the very reason we humans want to help is evidence against the blind-non-forward-thinking-planning, very nature, of evolution!
But that too is an evolved trait that improves the survival of the breeding population. There are species that would not do this, yes?
By feeding others you have more potential mates, and those mates are more likely to want to breed with you over others that don't feed them.
If evolution is completely indifferent to morality (indeed, it doesn't care that it doesn't even care) then why has it gone on produce creatures (us at least) that do!
Because it is an advantage for the breeding population as a whole.
What is morality? Is it different for a tiger than for a human?
Where would I (a machine for gene survival) ever get a notion in the first place to help, if the very giving of that help might infringe on my own gene survival. ...
Enlightened self-interest: helping others when they are at a disadvantage means there are more to take care of you when you are disadvantaged. Helping potential mates gives you and advantage for access to reproduction. Game theory also shows that cooperation works. See John Nash who shared the 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with game theorists Reinhard Selten and John Harsanyi.
John Forbes Nash Jr. - Wikipedia
quote:
Nash earned a doctorate in 1950 with a 28-page dissertation on non-cooperative games.[7][8] The thesis, which was written under the supervision of doctoral advisor Albert W. Tucker, contained the definition and properties of what would later be called the "Nash equilibrium". It's a crucial concept in non-cooperative games, and won Nash the Nobel prize in economics in 1994.
Nash's major publications relating to this concept are in the following papers:
  • Nash, JF (1950). "Equilibrium Points in N-person Games". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 36 (36): 48—9. doi:10.1073/pnas.36.1.48. PMC 1063129. PMID 16588946., MR 0031701.
  • "The Bargaining Problem". Econometrica (18): 155—62. 1950.. MR 0035977.
  • Nash, J. (1951). "Non-cooperative Games". Annals of Mathematics 54 (54): 286—95. doi:10.2307/1969529. JSTOR 1969529..
  • "Two-person Cooperative Games". Econometrica (21): 128—40. 1953., MR 0053471.

Evolution is like a giant trial and error computer, and it tries out many scenarios over and over, and those that provide breeding populations for the next generation are used for the next cycle of trial and error experiments.
This natural trial and error computer comes to the same conclusion as Nash's game theory. What a surprise.
... Maybe helping is a bad trait that will be worked out of human evolution, what a despicable thought! But evolutionary theory allows this to be a reasonable possibility!!!
Curiously it is "despicable" because your view is based on a social animal "morality" rather than an antisocial animal "morality" ... your view is based on your culture\learning.
Sharing behavior is not exclusive to humans, but to many animals. There is an experiment with capucin monkeys
There are others showing how selfish behavior is punished.
... Maybe helping is a bad trait that will be worked out of human evolution, what a despicable thought! But evolutionary theory allows this to be a reasonable possibility!!!
It is only reasonable if it provides an advantage to the individuals
It is only a "bad" trait if it interferes with survival or reproduction success for the breeding population.
My root position, is that life is given, and that evolution is a non-starter!
You are welcome to your opinion, however opinion has been demonstrated to be remarkably incapable of altering reality in any way. All you are affecting is your ability to learn about reality.
Do you have any evidence "that evolution is a non-starter" or just opinion?
If you come here questioning science based on a poor and incomplete understanding of what you are questioning, and you are unwilling to learn or change your opinion then what is your purpose here?
Do you think you will convince anyone that your opinion is a wonderful thing?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:44 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 22 of 142 (716587)
01-19-2014 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:16 AM


Re: dice?
remember those dice, they needed someone to roll them in the first place.
Just like the avalanche that falls on its own, those "dice" dont need someone to roll them.
Take a look at any life its base components are all chemical fallowing the laws of chemistry in our universe. All evolution needs to get started is a self replicating molecule. And in billions of years you can get something as "complex" as us and if you derive complexity from the size of the genome even something as complex as a marbled lungfish, With 40 times as many base pairs as us.
And yes evolution is a poor designer just look at the human eye no intelligent designer would design such a flawed thing. The retina is 'inside out The nerves and blood vessels lie on the surface of the retina instead of behind it, This arrangement forces a number of complex adaptations and gives mammals a blind spot.
No sensible person would design a seeing apparatus with a bunch of stuff in the way of the seeing receptacle. You put that stuff behind it. But evolution dosent mind dosent think it just does and a poor eye is better then no eye.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:16 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(3)
Message 23 of 142 (716588)
01-19-2014 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Col2v8
01-18-2014 2:42 PM


I'll be blunt. If someone where to explain the evolution of senses to the best of human knowledge - you wouldn't understand it. I would recommend a BSc in molecular biology and a Masters in evolutionary biology or some similar combination. Really, if I started to talk about seven-transmembrane domain receptors or the precursors to opsin would you consider yourself informed or would you find that you were actually having to learn pretty advanced stuff before you could follow along?
In short - you are starting with an incredibly advanced question, and I feel that if you don't get an answer that you can understand or is insufficiently complete, you will simply dismiss it. This is not the way to learn.
There are natural processes that you probably don't deny that sort things.
For instance - grind some grain and then feed it through a mesh/sieve. How does the sieve know to let fine flour through but not let large kernels through?
Put a mixture of sand, small stones and larger stones in a container of water. Vigorously mix it, then let it settle. You'll find the bigger stones towards the bottom and the sand will tend to settle on top. How does it know?
How do the small objects know to orbit the larger ones? When you throw lots of objects around - how do they know to form distinct orbits?
The answer is, no knowledge is present. It is just a natural consequence.
Are there any scientific papers/studies by evolutionist
Yes.
New insights into the evolutionary history of photoreceptor cells. Plachetzki DC, Serb JM, Oakley TH.
Why not start there?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Col2v8, posted 01-18-2014 2:42 PM Col2v8 has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 24 of 142 (716595)
01-19-2014 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:23 AM


Re: To Know Or Not To Know
Collosians2:8 writes:
... how did a cell evolve and organise itself in the first place to know that light impacting on it could be used as energy...
How did you know that a ball could be used as a toy? You tried it and it worked. If it didn't work, if it wasn't fun - e.g. if it bit you - you would have tried something else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:23 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 25 of 142 (716620)
01-19-2014 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:16 AM


Re: dice?
My root position is that life is given, and that evolution is a non-starter...
Yesterday you didn't know what natural selection was. Might there not still be things you don't know about evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:16 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 26 of 142 (716624)
01-19-2014 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:16 AM


no dice?
...dice never go on to produce creatures, (us at least) who do know? So its moot what they don't know.
But the example shows you how natural selection over generations can develop something that would be improbable without it. Curiously that is all the example was intended to, or needed to, convey.
I honestly don't understand your logic here, but what I do grasp makes for a cold chill at what life is being reduced to... namely, that life is something that has happened, but which also might not have happened.
Your personal like or dislike of reality is irrelevant.
It may also be that the universe it primed to form life under a variety of conditions of which earth just happened to be one. See Panspermic Pre-Biotic Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part I) for evidence that supports this view.
What we do know is that life does exist on this planet and that it did not exist when the earth was first formed, 4.5 + billion years ago, as the first evidence of life is at ~3.7 billion years ago ... and we know that we do not know how that life began, as this first evidence of life was already developed as a simple single cell algae.
My root position is that life is given, ...
How do you define life? One cannot discuss origins without being able to define what life is.
My definition is "something capable of the process of evolution" -- again from Message 7
quote:
(1) The process of evolution involves changes in the composition of hereditary traits, and changes to the frequency of their distributions within breeding populations from generation to generation, in response to ecological challenges and opportunities.
(you can also read evolution 101)
So all you need for life is a reproducing population, a mechanism to inherit traits and a mechanism to add variation/s.
If you have any questions from reading the Berkeley site, feel free to ask.
... and that evolution is a non-starter...
And yet the process of evolution is an observed fact and it occurs in every living species alive today and we can see evidence that it has occurred in all records of life as we know it.
Denial of facts is foolish, not rational logical objective thought.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:16 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Col2v8
Junior Member (Idle past 3720 days)
Posts: 6
Joined: 01-17-2014


Message 27 of 142 (716651)
01-19-2014 10:39 PM


and that's it
I have discovered something much worse than going around in cycles in debates about Evolution v Creation - keeping track of replies to an original post -- !!!
I am very new to forums, and this is not for me, after just one day, I cannot keep track of who to respond to, who replied to what, just don't have the time for one thing!
Its a shame, but I cannot commit to this, and will be cancelling my membership.
thank you to all who made a reply, that I did read!

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Theodoric, posted 01-20-2014 12:11 AM Col2v8 has not replied
 Message 30 by AZPaul3, posted 01-20-2014 12:18 AM Col2v8 has not replied
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 01-20-2014 9:19 AM Col2v8 has not replied
 Message 32 by jar, posted 01-20-2014 9:49 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 28 of 142 (716659)
01-19-2014 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 9:23 AM


Re: To Know Or Not To Know
how do you get the stages going ever towards this immense sophistication and manipulation of light.
Well, lets see.
quote:
If you understand why/how random mutation together with selection works it is not difficult to assume changes in the cell wall or within the cell structure that would become sensitive to these impacts from the environment.
As has been said, this "how could it know ..." part is a personification of a process that has no capacity to know or care. It just is.
Second, if anything in the environment impacts the cells in anyway whatsoever there is an opportunity, taken or not, for some random mutation to occur that might make use of such a thing. It does not have to know it is there prior to the mutation or even that the new capability is there, yet. In fact, the cell has no capacity to know. It is just there. If there is a benefit to the new response to stimuli then, maybe, more babies are made. If the response to the stimuli is detrimental then, maybe, fewer babies are made.
And, as I said, once a response to stimuli is there then this can lead to alterations (note I did not say improvements) of the response by other mutations taking place. And, again, if these alterations are good then more babies. If bad then less babies.
Assume we have a million cells in a colony somewhere. Because of the way they separate from their progenitor cells mutations are introduced. Some of these mutations, not all, cause some cells to respond to light (pick a response - I don't care). This cell responds in this way, that cell responds in a different way and others in other ways since they have different mutations as initiators and some respond in quite similar ways but have different mutations as the initiator. The responses that are beneficial help its cells be progenitor to more daughter cells passing on the new responses. And that cycle repeats and repeats again introducing, without knowing or caring, other mutations that alter in some ways this panoply of inherited response mechanisms and the more or less babies and the recycle yet again generation after generation.
If you have no respect for time and the number of different but parallel trials being implemented then you can never hope to appreciate the enormous complexity such miniscule incremental changes can ultimately create tens of thousands of generations from now.
As for your first question, what would seem to you to be the bigger question:
how did a cell evolve and organise itself in the first place ...
We have some limited ideas, but nothing even close to certain, how the chemistry of self-replicating inheritable molecules came to be. There are some 4 or 5 different hypotheses, each one somewhat different yet somewhat similar, on how the processes developed. However, at this point no one knows. Not even you.
But, once the process started then the same mechanism I described above (evolution) generated the various cell organizations and everything else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 9:23 AM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 29 of 142 (716662)
01-20-2014 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 10:39 PM


Re: and that's it
Did you post to an Evo site for a class assignment? You might want to try some critical thinking skills.
Typical creo. Run and hide.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 10:39 PM Col2v8 has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(6)
Message 30 of 142 (716663)
01-20-2014 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Col2v8
01-19-2014 10:39 PM


Re: and that's it
Didn't see this earlier. Maybe we can change this.
I understand what you are going through. You leave one question and get 6 responses. You respond to one or two and get 5 more responses to each new one. It snowballs and gets confusing and frustrating.
I see you have left 4 posts and gotten 21 responses. That can be a bit hard to take.
Nothing in the Constitution or bylaws of the universe says you have to respond to everything. You're a nice person and feel you owe a response to each message you get. Don't be so nice.
Once you have read a few responses pick one or two and respond to them only. You can even pick on one or two folks and correspond with them exclusively for a while. Just ignore the jumble of posts from everyone else and be selective. It will save you some time and a lot of sanity.
Don't be concerned about making the ones you ignore upset. We all have been there, understand what and why you would do this, and since we are all (mostly anyway) adults here we, the ignored ones, will get over it or go cry somewhere private or something.
And besides, that would be a whole lot better than to lose you.
Give it a try.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Col2v8, posted 01-19-2014 10:39 PM Col2v8 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024