tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post3973982653137143372..comments2024-01-23T02:32:28.567-08:00Comments on Darwin's God: New Research: Retina Wiring Architecture Crucial in Image ProcessingUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger110125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-18762518237897745222011-03-27T17:55:25.302-07:002011-03-27T17:55:25.302-07:00Zachriel wrote: There are a variety of very simple...Zachriel wrote: There are a variety of very simple systems that can be adapted to more complex systems and behaviors. <br /><br />We observe gradients in sensory system complexity. A jelly fish is one such example. From Wikipedia... <br /><br /><i>A jellyfish does not have a brain or central nervous system, but rather has a loose network of nerves, located in the epidermis, which is called a "nerve net". A jellyfish detects various stimuli including the touch of other animals via this nerve net, which then transmits impulses both throughout the nerve net and around a circular nerve ring, through the rhopalial lappet, located at the rim of the jellyfish body, to other nerve cells. Some jellyfish also have ocelli: light-sensitive organs that do not form images but which can detect light, and are used to determine up from down, responding to sunlight shining on the water's surface. These are generally pigment spot ocelli, which have some cells (not all) pigmented.</i>Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11193595678064010528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-88805637891593321552011-03-26T09:00:48.474-07:002011-03-26T09:00:48.474-07:00Mahima: So there was a creature with no eyes. Then...<b>Mahima</b>: <i>So there was a creature with no eyes. Then there was one with an eye spot. And simultaneous wiring to make it move when it a shadow passes. </i><br /><br />Sigh. It was your scenario. This is what you said: <br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>Let's consider a primitive moving creature. It develops an eye spot on it's back. The nerves which were already present on the skin send the impulse to the brain any time light falls on it. So the organism has itches now and then and it's irritates him to death. No advantage but the trait passes on to it's offspring. </i><br /><br />We answered that question. We have an organism with an eye that causes an itch. When a shadow passes, it itches and it moves. That by itself can be a significant benefit. Consider the lowly housefly as you swat at it. <br /><br />In any case, metazoa inherited a huge number of complex adaptations, including light sensitivity and intercellular communication. <br /><br />Your basic contention is that the complex visual system of vertebrates couldn't have evolved because they require too many parts to have occurred simultaneously. But if you actually look at various biological organisms, you will see that is not the case. There are a variety of very simple systems that can be adapted to more complex systems and behaviors. Try to understand the simple cases first, such as Euglena; how and why a simple system can provide an evolutionary advantage.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-65893662810859121142011-03-25T21:35:47.762-07:002011-03-25T21:35:47.762-07:00Zachriel said...
It doesn't have to comprehend...Zachriel said...<br />It doesn't have to comprehend anything. You said it tickled or itched. A simple reflex, like your blink reflex.<br />********<br /><br />So there was a creature with no eyes. Then there was one with an eye spot. And simultaneous wiring to make it move when it a shadow passes. So, agreed it doesn't have to comprehend the shadow but it's brain has to be changed in a certain way for what you said to come about.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-67658894035379577242011-03-25T21:04:00.211-07:002011-03-25T21:04:00.211-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-34473417581551914722011-03-25T21:00:51.949-07:002011-03-25T21:00:51.949-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-59151845860387026752011-03-25T07:34:39.555-07:002011-03-25T07:34:39.555-07:00Zachriel: Yes, and whenever a shadow passes, it mo...<b>Zachriel</b>: <i>Yes, and whenever a shadow passes, it moves to avoid being eaten. It doesn't matter which way it moves. It's better than sitting there. </i><br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>You assume it already comprehends it. </i><br /><br />It doesn't have to comprehend anything. You said it tickled or itched. A simple reflex, like your blink reflex.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-18070400186096732242011-03-25T06:11:28.400-07:002011-03-25T06:11:28.400-07:00Gary said...
The probability (statistical mechani...<i>Gary said...<br /><br />The probability (statistical mechanics) of having a vision system, like the human eye, arise by random chance and necessity (Darwinism) is so astronomically small that one actually has a better chance of pin pointing a single elementary particle somewhere in the universe on the first try than of RMs + NS producing a functional eye.</i><br /><br />Then <b>show us the calculations</b> and <b>justify any assumptions you make.</b><br /><br />You've been running that big mouth for a year now about how 'statistical mechanics disproves ToE' but haven't presented one single solitary thing to back it up.<br /><br />Talk is cheap Gary the yappy little puppy. And all you are is empty blustering talk.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-66869164965229094862011-03-25T06:09:50.219-07:002011-03-25T06:09:50.219-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-41752658634130487742011-03-24T23:44:48.384-07:002011-03-24T23:44:48.384-07:00Well here we go again. The usual Darwinistas spewi...Well here we go again. The usual Darwinistas spewing forth the usual codswallop.<br /><br />So sad that none of these deaf, DUMB and blind Darwinian fundamentalists know nothing at all about statistical mechanics, algorithmic information theory or combinatorial dependencies -such as found in all living systems at every level.<br /><br />The probability (statistical mechanics) of having a vision system, like the human eye, arise by random chance and necessity (Darwinism) is so astronomically small that one actually has a better chance of pin pointing a single elementary particle somewhere in the universe on the first try than of RMs + NS producing a functional eye.<br /><br />Darwinian scenarios to evolution of eyes are childishly and naively simplistic to the point of being ridiculous. Always a good laugh though.<br /><br />Don't bother the poor Darwhiner though with such facts, he does not know anything about facts. The Darwhiners prefer speculation and just-so stories to facts and logic any day. The whole of their "science" is built upon story telling.<br /><br /><b>Darwinists are immune to logic.</b><br /><br /><i>"The one that created the eye, does he not see?"</i><br />Of course, he must.<br /><br /><i>"Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning; just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning."</i><br /><br />Indeed, sight is a meaningless concept to nature, but vision systems as elegant and exquisite as we find in ourselves and all around us are supposed to have come about by pure luck!<br /><br />My but these people are gullible!<br /><br />The space shuttle too I suppose must have risen the same way; um except its no where near as sophisticated as a human eye.<br /><br />Oh gee, you say its not organic so its a bad analogy? My goodness who'd a thought huh?<br /><br />There are far more signs of design in the human eye than there are in the space shuttle.<br /><br />Darwinists are hopelessly lost in a chaotic morass of bad logic, really bad science, faith based beliefs (the whole Darwinian fairy tale) and pure stupidity.<br /><br />No wonder Hoyle said they are mentally ill. We see it proven every day on this blog.Gary H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16324820645215394691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-9813766363984615902011-03-24T19:49:19.484-07:002011-03-24T19:49:19.484-07:00Zachriel said...
Not sure why you would think it ...Zachriel said... <br />Not sure why you would think it would be so difficult for a multicellular organism. When we are discussing multicellular organisms, life has already been evolving for hundreds of millions of years, from the most primitive to highly complex and colonial eukaryotic cells. <br />******* <br /><br />It was already there is place because of evolution. Then evolution made some changes and voila!<br />******<br /><br /><br />Yes, and whenever a shadow passes, it moves to avoid being eaten. It doesn't matter which way it moves. It's better than sitting there. <br />******<br /><br />You assume it already comprehends it. That the light stimulus has been wired such a way that when light falls, it moves. Why would that be? "Shadow" and "passing" shadow. I see you still don't get the point. Never mind.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-27993560366354876552011-03-24T16:03:06.638-07:002011-03-24T16:03:06.638-07:00A.J said...
I never said I was unable to summ...<i>A.J said...<br /><br /> I never said I was unable to summarize what the links were about. </i><br /><br />True. I said it, and you keep confirming it. I guess 'witnessing' stuff you don't understand is the best you can do.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-36719368215970914162011-03-24T15:56:03.506-07:002011-03-24T15:56:03.506-07:00I never said I was unable to summarize what the li...I never said I was unable to summarize what the links were about. Frankly I'm not trying to get in a lengthy argument on Cornelius' blog, which is why I posted the links for everyone to examine by themselves so they can evaluate the evidence first-hand. I see you cant wrap your head around it, so you attack it. Thats ok. <br />Btw, Im not Dr. Robert A. Herrmann.<br />What are you, paranoid?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16563862227488663067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-67381176864871603782011-03-24T15:33:35.658-07:002011-03-24T15:33:35.658-07:00That being said. An indecipherable meaningless sal...<i>That being said. An indecipherable meaningless salad?<br />What, are you on a diet thorton? Just because you don't have the mental capacity to understand what the papers I provided were about doesn't mean they are nonsense.</i><br /><br />LOL! You're the guy who is just posting C&Ped links from Creation.com and is unable to explain or summarize the ideas in his own words.<br /><br />Let me guess - A.J. is short for "R.A. Herrmann, a misunderstood genius who the scientific community has been blackballing because the can't handle his brilliant world-changing ideas!" Right?<br /><br />Get in line behind Louis the Fruit Loop if you want to apply for the job of resident crackpot.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-13932086791915809042011-03-24T14:37:45.253-07:002011-03-24T14:37:45.253-07:00I apologize. I should have made the topic of the l...I apologize. I should have made the topic of the links I provided clearer. The first two links are in fact about a scientific case for intelligent design with respect to cosmology. They are not about the model for ID headed by Behe,Dembski ect...<br /><br />http://www.raherrmann.com/gidt.htm<br /><br />http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j23_1/j23_1_62-69.pdf<br /><br />That being said. An indecipherable meaningless salad?<br />What, are you on a diet thorton? Just because you don't have the mental capacity to understand what the papers I provided were about doesn't mean they are nonsense. Boy you are arrogant. And also, can you provide any citations from papers appearing in "real science journals" that supposedly "shredded" the Dembski papers I Provided?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16563862227488663067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-1573452572288881722011-03-24T09:48:52.059-07:002011-03-24T09:48:52.059-07:00Mahima: So maybe you could come up with a more sci...<b>Mahima</b>: <i>So maybe you could come up with a more scientific explanation of the process. </i><br /><br />Keep in mind that even single-celled organisms have the capability of responding to light and gravity in a manner that provides an evolutionary advantage. Not sure why you would think it would be so difficult for a multicellular organism. When we are discussing multicellular organisms, life has already been evolving for hundreds of millions of years, from the most primitive to highly complex and colonial eukaryotic cells. <br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>The nerves which were already present on the skin send the impulse to the brain any time light falls on it. </i><br /><br />Yes, and whenever a shadow passes, it moves to avoid being eaten. It doesn't matter which way it moves. It's better than sitting there.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-42312176422766883962011-03-24T09:26:06.179-07:002011-03-24T09:26:06.179-07:00Mahima: It's like you see stills of images and...<b>Mahima</b>: <i>It's like you see stills of images and arrange them to make up a story. </i><br /><br />Yes, there are a large number of well-represented lineages that can be arranged in such a manner. Of course, there are lots of gaps too. That's why scientists, since Darwin actually, work with the nested hierarchy as the primary ordering pattern. As an example, here's a dinosaur cladogram. <br />http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/Cladogram/CladogramComplete.jpg<br /><br /><b>Zachriel</b>: <i>No one knows all the changes required to turn even a wolf into a great dane. Your argument would be that it didn't happen. However, we know that it did happen. </i><br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>You are entitled to your viewpoint. </i><br /><br />Are you actually saying that modern dogs do not share common descent with wolves? <br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>I'll do that but it better be about forming an ear from scratch. </i><br /><br />This was your objection: <br /><br /><b>Mahima</b>: <i>And major jumps for evolution seem implausible in the kind of universe we live in. Robots do not spring into existence. </i><br /><br />The mammalian middle ear is a complex structure that evolved from more primitive reptilian structures. If we show how this happened, then it demonstrates that complex structures can evolve incrementally. It answers your objection.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-21899336284367606072011-03-24T09:10:58.001-07:002011-03-24T09:10:58.001-07:00@ Thorton and Zachriel
Okay and you don't seem...@ Thorton and Zachriel<br />Okay and you don't seem to see the problem which arises when we try to delve into the problem of evolving a creature. Since you refuse to try, I'll do it. Let me break it up for you. It's a simple scenario, I do not ask you to tell me which mutation occurred at which position leading to change in which protein and all but I'm sure you know that those details will be answered someday leading to total rejection or acceptance of ToE.<br /><br />Let's consider a primitive moving creature. It develops an eye spot on it's back. The nerves which were already present on the skin send the impulse to the brain any time light falls on it. So the organism has itches now and then and it's irritates him to death. No advantage but the trait passes on to it's offspring. For some generations the eye spot passes on without any advantage (evolution getting lucky here but I'll be lenient) and now another mutation occurs which causes a change in it's brain and now the organism can see some flashes inside it's brain. It's doesn't react, it might get distracted but may be not. So the trait is passing on for a few more generations and the organism can now tell the difference in the images in his brain when it's moving and the images it sees when it's still. So maybe the creature tries to feed on stuff which is still rather than moving. So the trait gets selected. Now somehow a changes in it's brain can tell it when it's dark and when there's light. Pass on. Now, let's say the creature learns to tell that this is up, the trait gets selected. Why? Now it can tell what is down. the trait passes on. The creature still doesn't know a thing about what is that in front of it and what is in the background. Huh. Now it starts to get changes in the brain to tell what a predator looks like. So if the predator approaches from up or down, it can move away, but it still needs to know which side would be "away". But luckily it did the right move and the trait passed on. Now the creature knows what is right. and what is left and now he develops the mental machinery to get all this data and form a picture which has some meaning...<br /><br />You get the idea now. Now I'm sure you've read more scientific papers than I have. So maybe you could come up with a more scientific explanation of the process.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-43917569362336988942011-03-24T08:07:01.984-07:002011-03-24T08:07:01.984-07:00Mahima said...
You don't know one thing a...<i>Mahima said...<br /><br /> You don't know one thing about how evolution could have happened but you BELIEVE it happened!</i><br /><br />(chuckle) Damn, all those years of undergrad and grad school gone to waste! But I don't know one thing about evolution. That's why I spend time writing up technical responses to boobs like you, because I don't know anything.<br /><br />And I don't BELIEVE in the theory of evolution. I ACCEPT the theory as the best explanation for observed phenomena based on the huge amount of consilient positive evidence. You God-botheres can't seem to grasp the difference.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-3958018905224553072011-03-24T08:06:02.058-07:002011-03-24T08:06:02.058-07:00Demanding the level of detail you do is extremely ...Demanding the level of detail you do is extremely unreasonable, to the point of deliberate intellectual dishonesty.<br /><br />I don't agree!<br /><br />And when you get off your lazy butt, try and solve the real problems of details which ToE lacks.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-68062217352789932752011-03-24T08:00:15.541-07:002011-03-24T08:00:15.541-07:00Mahima said...
We suggested lines of evidence...<i>Mahima said...<br /><br /> We suggested lines of evidence you might learn about, but you didn't seem interested. Are you familiar with Darwin's arguments in Origin of Species? Do you understand the nested hierarchy?<br /><br /> I came here with a simple question, to figure out whether evolutionists might answer some questions I had about how exactly evolution got us here. Turns out you prefer not to answer them but instead gauge my level of knowledge. Well, I am familiar with both of them.</i><br /><br />We'll add 'liar' along with 'scientifically illiterate' to your resume.<br /><br />Did you actually read the Lamb overview paper on vertebrate eye evolution? Did you research or read any of the other studies referenced?<br /><br />Why don't you make a list of the specific things you think the researches got wrong, along with your supporting evidence. let's see how familiar you are with the actual scientific evidence.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-86440760489658769732011-03-24T07:58:29.802-07:002011-03-24T07:58:29.802-07:00Thorton said..
Zachriel didn't say that, I di...Thorton said..<br /><br />Zachriel didn't say that, I did. And the reason I stopped reading is because when I see a clueless boob like you who doesn't know the first thing about the theory he's criticizing I am pretty much assured any rational discussion will be useless. <br />*****<br />My bad!<br /><br />You don't know one thing about how evolution could have happened but you BELIEVE it happened!<br /><br />And you're right in saying rational discussion seems a bit difficult here as you are more interested in ridiculing someone with a different viewpoint than yours than trying to unravel the mystery. :)Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-17168284676708286492011-03-24T07:54:20.058-07:002011-03-24T07:54:20.058-07:00We suggested lines of evidence you might learn abo...We suggested lines of evidence you might learn about, but you didn't seem interested. Are you familiar with Darwin's arguments in Origin of Species? Do you understand the nested hierarchy? <br /><br />I came here with a simple question, to figure out whether evolutionists might answer some questions I had about how exactly evolution got us here. Turns out you prefer not to answer them but instead gauge my level of knowledge. Well, I am familiar with both of them.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-4044306255550437702011-03-24T07:53:29.408-07:002011-03-24T07:53:29.408-07:00Mahima said...
Zachriel said...
I stopp...<i>Mahima said...<br /><br /> Zachriel said...<br /><br /><br /> I stopped reading right there. No scientist anywhere says eyes or brains or any body feature formed by random chance. The formed from an evolutionary process that employs feedback - random genetic variations FILTERED BY SELECTION and used for each subsequent generation.<br /><br /> Why oh why of why do these ^(*&*$ Creationists always leave out the SELECTION part??<br /><br /><br /> *******<br /><br /> Your mental lethargy is the reason you don't question. You don't think.</i><br /><br />Zachriel didn't say that, I did. And the reason I stopped reading is because when I see a clueless boob like you who doesn't know the first thing about the theory he's criticizing I am pretty much assured any rational discussion will be useless.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-61601244477195790652011-03-24T07:50:12.448-07:002011-03-24T07:50:12.448-07:00Mahima said...
Thorton says this-
Of cour...<i>Mahima said...<br /><br /> Thorton says this-<br /> Of course it's not, any more than we need to know the detailed history of every Allied and Axis soldier from 1939-1945 to establish that WW2 happened.<br /><br /> Where are your details of how, where, and when your Designer created eyes?<br /><br /> Why do you get to make all these demands of science but won't provide a single detail in return?<br /> *********<br /><br /> The thing you say about the war is stupid- the war was evident, evolution is not.</i><br /><br />Evolution is very evident to those who have studied the scientific evidence. So much so that there are thousand of successful companies whose business model depends on it. They use the evolution model because <b>it works.</b> How many companies can you name that are based on the *poof* idea of special creation? AIG's bogus 'museum'?<br /><br /><i>And I don't presume to know if there is a designer and how he created eyes but I do wish to know how evolution did it?</i><br /><br />Then go take some college level biology and genetics courses, and read the primary scientific literature. Logistics prohibit you getting anything more than an overview here.<br /><br /><i>But you cannot agree that my questions are unreasonable. </i><br /><br />Demanding the level of detail you do is extremely unreasonable, to the point of deliberate intellectual dishonesty.<br /><br /><i>I am just trying that you explain me how it happens. </i><br /><br />Then get off you lazy butt and read the papers provided. The Lamb overview paper on vertebrate eye evolution has references to at least 50 other published scientific studies. How many of them have you read?<br /><br /><i>Evolution can't enjoy the benefit of the doubt forever!<br />And about the details of how something accepted as a fact - evolution- happens, it's pretty evident you are as clueless as I am!</i><br /><br />(chuckle) Hardly.<br /><br /><i>NS and RM are just words till we know the exact mechanism. </i><br /><br />We do know the mechanism. Not knowing every last molecule in every evolutionary change doesn't mean not knowing anything about the process or results.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-72739334491759081802011-03-24T07:46:29.616-07:002011-03-24T07:46:29.616-07:00Zachriel said...
I stopped reading right there. ...Zachriel said...<br /><br /><br />I stopped reading right there. No scientist anywhere says eyes or brains or any body feature formed by random chance. The formed from an evolutionary process that employs feedback - random genetic variations FILTERED BY SELECTION and used for each subsequent generation.<br /><br />Why oh why of why do these ^(*&*$ Creationists always leave out the SELECTION part?? <br /><br /><br />*******<br /><br />Your mental lethargy is the reason you don't question. You don't think.Maxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10977651178530653222noreply@blogger.com