by gringojj 62 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Pink Floyd Song. Wish You Were Here. '...we're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year...' For all we know, we're part of some kids lab experiment and right now he's looking in his insectarium pissing himself laughing at all of us wasting our time wondering whether there is a god or not. Fuck it!! Live a little.
I'm with you.
And damn wasn't it good to hear the Floyd in action singing that very song on Live8
Ostrich wings may be a bad example of intelligent design, but it doesn't do much for evolution theory either. According to evolution, shouldn't an animal burdened with useless wings be killed off by more fit species. Or shouldn't a mutation have occured where those wings dropped off completely by now? Or, maybe the ostrich used to have arms, but they mutated into wings, and eventually the wings will be big enough for the ostrich to fly. That wouldn't be fair, a bird that could run fast and fly. Then maybe it would grow gills and fins and be the fastest running, flying, swimming bird in the world.
You know - people choking to death on a chicken bone while thanking Jehovar aloud for the chicken.
LOL Pole!
first of all, i would just like to say that intelligent design is not a scientific theory in the same way that the theory of evolution is. the proponents of ID have no peer reviewed papers in scientific journals. and the whole argument that is ID, is really just a souped up version of creationism that makes heavy use of the argument from design and the argument from personal incredulity.
ID may make use of features already found in the ToE and geology, but in the end it all boils down to "god did it".
of course there is bad design everywhere. i don't like the fact that my urethra goes through my prostate gland which is prone to swelling. there is the fact (i think already mentioned) of junk DNA. the question here that could be asked is if a creator was cutting corners and arbitrarily pasting 97% of the human genome into chimps, why would he copy the DNA errors as well? indeed, why are there errors in the first place?
and then there is also the fact that many complex systems, like the eye, have evolved independently in different species while arriving in our day as very similar systems. but they do not have the same biological origins. like the eye of the human and the octopus. they are quite similar, but the octopus eye is actually better "designed" than the human's eye. as well, echolocation has been shown to have evolved independently in at least two different species of bats.
According to evolution, shouldn't an animal burdened with useless wings be killed off by more fit species.
george,
not at all. perhaps some have died because they could not fly away from a predator. but when you study evolution, one of the first things you learn is that evolution works gradually on populations, not individuals. the wings of an ostrich may be vestigial, but for some reason it has not stopped it from being successful.
also, evolution is not about animals arbitrarily growing gills and wings. you make it sound as though these traits just popped up in a species with a single mutation. if you cannot fathom a certain change to a population of a certain species, then just make the mutation steps in your head smaller over a longer period of time, and you will see how species evolve gradually.
if you cannot fathom a certain change to a population of a certain species, then just make the mutation steps in your head smaller over a longer period of time, and you will see how species evolve gradually.
I can fathom a particular species becoming smarter, taller, different skin colors, where the most fit of a particular species moves on. What I can't fathom is the simultaneous evolution of all the species culminating in the present eco-system. I can't fathom a simple structure becoming more complex by accident. I have a hard time imagining all the small steps that were taking place while male and female genitalia were evolving independently and somehow fit together. I find the evolutionists answer to the inexplicable is always that "longer period of time" - trillions of years. Its no different than the religious explanation for the inexplicable - God. I've got to choose between "God did it" or "trillions and trillions of years did it." Neither one makes any sense.
georgefoster,
I can't fathom a simple structure becoming more complex by accident.
Natural selection is very different from "accident." Natural selection is very similar to artificial selection, in which a human breeder chooses traits he likes, except that in natural selection the breeder is the environment. A good example of a simple structure becoming more complex (if you like) via natural selection is the panda's "thumb," which has evolved from a tiny wrist bone into a pseudo-appendage that the panda uses to grasp and eat bamboo shoots.
Here's an article I wrote on it: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/91134/1.ashx
I have a hard time imagining all the small steps that were taking place while male and female genitalia were evolving independently and somehow fit together.
Male and female genitalia clearly did not evolve independantly and then just happen to fit together. Think about it for a bit.
I find the evolutionists answer to the inexplicable is always that "longer period of time" - trillions of years.
I find that this is what creationist organizations such as the Watchtower say that evolutionists say. In reality, scientists have proposed very plausible explanations for even very complex organs. For example, Richard Dawkins gives a set of very smooth, very small steps along a very plausible path to mammal-style camera eyes in Climbing Mount Improbable, which is a pretty good read, although I would recommend a more introductory book on evolution first. With regard to eye evolution, however, I hope to sum up the above chapter in Dawkin's book and write an article for this board in the near future.
Hope that helps.
SNG
Making humans able to think of God
Its no different than the religious explanation for the inexplicable - God.
george,
no one is telling you to take it on faith. unlike god's "existence", there is much falsifiable evidence for evolution that fits together making a lgical whole. there is no faith, just data. and it's all in books at your local library.
OK guys. I'll take try to take a closer look at the science. I'd be glad for it to all make sense.
Oh COME on this is an OBVIOUS question.
Bad example of intelligent design?
FIrst god made man, then she realised what a cock up that was, upgraded the whole system and made woman .
