the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
cofty yes I read the article, " Overall, our results support the predictions of the social signalling hypothesis but not the crypsis hypothesis, suggesting that the evolution of dramatic colour change in some chameleon species evolved as a strategy to facilitate social signalling."
I agree that some of it is related to social signalling.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
rebel8 - why limit it to a supernatural force? Another advanced life form whose scientific and biological advancements far surpassed our own, able to create and or tweak life forms. If there is no 'supernatural' force, as of now it feels to me that we are not the origin of life, we are byproducts of something else.
Let's say humans develop AI and either create a digital universe or advance robots that can learn, duplicate, evolve, etc, and they are dumped on another planet. Would the digital universe or robots on another planet eventually believe that they evolved from nothing? there would be no evidence of us, their creators being there.
The alternative to somehow it all just happening is not the only possibly explanation. Infact in the bible, did not Peter or Paul have that vision of a vessel dumping all kinds of animals and creatures on the earth, when he declared all animals may be acceptable to eat? (as if that vessel was a spaceship?)
I am merely suggesting intelligence involved. Is it impossible that one day scientists will be able to figure out a way to create life and create new species, abilities? What's to say another life form didn't do that with us long ago?
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
So cofty, why didn't you take the WT's word on being critical of them because you don't understand? Don't they teach not to be critical because you don't understand and how the GB are experts?
Before you became athiest did you just accept what so called experts and scientists said because you believed they knew best whether you understood it or not just like you did with the governing body?
"Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice...."
Perhaps that's why the WT doesn't teach about the faithful and discreet slave doctrine to bible studies because it can't be understood until they've read the basic books and stuff? So JW's are right to have to study everything before explaining the faithful and discreet slave?
I am in college and will eventually touch upon many of these topics just due to the GE requirement. But I'll challenge anything that can't be explained and unless there is definite evidence, undisputable evidence, then all theories and probabilities I'll take exactly like religion, with a grain of salt.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
Apognophos - Thanks, that was some really good critical thinking on your part. The example about how thoughts producing goosebumps, the wincing from perception to the eye, etc.
I wasn't aware it's believed that evolutionary processes that are not for a benefit happen, such as when you mentioned " ability to send environmental information to one's skin cells might develop before the skin cells can change color." I'll have to check into that, but if so, that makes your case a bit stronger.
Overall your response did move the impossibility of the idea over a few notches for me and gave me some things to investigate deeper, thanks.
A big plus on your end too was instead of just quoting a book or scientist or somebody saying something along the lines of 'this is the fact and take me word for it' you used reason and specific examples.
Having been a believing JW, I don't care if it's religion or science, I will never just take anybody's word for it no matter what their credentials are. So that's the way to reason with someone. Thanks again!
Space Madness - Yea exactly. I won't be surprised if the discussions/debates at some point look like this.... Athiest to believer: "Go back to first grade and read the basic science books". Believer to Athiest: "Read my book of bible stories then work your way up to the bible".
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
I read the article you linked apognophos - thanks for that one, I had read similar but this part did stand out, " It has been demonstrated that the background adaptation process is vision-dependent (it appears the animal needs to be able to see the environment to adapt to it)"
Atleast from the organisms point, it must require thought since they have to see the background first.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
Apognophos - I agree with your example for flounders and all relevant species like that example.
Here is one from your article that does do it on purpose,
Self-decorated sea urchin
Further information: Decorator crab
Self-decoration is employed by animals in different groups, including decorator crabs, which attach materials from their environment, as well as living organisms, to camouflage themselves. For example the Japanese hermit crab, Eupagurus constans, has the hydroid Hydractinia sodalis growing all over the shell that it lives in. Another hermit crab, Eupagurus cuanensis, has the aposematic orange spongeSuberites domuncula which is bitter-tasting and not eaten by fish. [20]
Similarly, Sea urchins use their tube feet to pick up debris from the bottom and attach it to their upper surfaces. They use shells, rocks, algae and sometimes sea anemones. [21]
But those behaviors in the above example could be an evolution, they learned to hide themselves. However what wouldn't make sense is if how those creatures above are hiding themselves, they suddenly developed the ability to change their bodies to appear that way vs putting those things on them. That's the question.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
apognophos, what about this example from the article you linked....." the big blue octopus , Octopus cyanea , hunts during the day, and can match itself to the colours and textures of its surroundings, both to avoid predators and to enable it to approach prey. It can perfectly resemble a rock or a coral it is hiding beside. When necessary, in order to scare away a potential predator, it can display markings which resemble eyes"
I accept that some animals and species have camoflauge as a by product or response and they may have just survived because of it. It's different from those who like the chameleon and big blue octopus that can "match itself to it's surroundings, perfectly resemble a rock or coral it is hiding beside', etc.
The only answer I can think from an athiest point of view might be that at some point an alien scientist genetically modified one to have that ability haha.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
Thank you apognophos for your input. I like how you admitted you can not answer the question and brought up a close alternative to try to answer it. Unlike cofty unwilling to admit and trying to be condescending with telling me to read 'basic' books as if the answer that you yourself admit you don't know should be basic elementary knowledge that doesn't even warrant an answer haha. And perhaps the answer has yet to be discovered.
I'm replying to your article in the next post.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
Cofty - your condescending comments without an ability to answer the question imply that you do not know the answer and trying to divert that lack of knowledge to me. Why don't you read some 'basic' (elementary, grade school books, implying you are an idiot) yourself and then perhaps you can explain, defend, and answer the question instead of trying to close the argument by having me do the research that you yourself are unwilling to do.
the part that does make sense are how bodies adapt over time to surroundings and use.
for example because of eating habits changing, our jaws have become smaller and we don't need wisdom teeth.
or the effect of the sun on our skin, etc.
apognophos - my theory assuming the species are the same is that the chameleons are comfortable w/ their human handlers so their color changes are only mood based since they don't feel the need to camouflage. That theory could be tested by presenting them w/ predators, etc, out of their comfort zone and seeing what happens.
