Evolution the myth

[Happy Forever]

why we have eyes is because we evolved in an environment that made being able to see helpful to survival. 

Thanks brother for your reply.

It's sister, actually.

Man the blind who doesn't know the meaning of sight, dreamt that he can see so he wished, cried alot, environment his mother is so soft and cute and merciful told him, what do you want my baby? Man said, I want to see Mumy although I don't know what does this word mean. His mumy said "Oh babe, as you know nothing is done by itself so we will work together, you tell me what you desire and I execute.

Why do we have eyes, brothers?

Asked and answered, and we at least were courteous enough not to use philosophy and fables which have nothing to do with anything as straight forward as natural selection. 

Yes, this is the only right answer to why, this why from which evolution trembles.

How in the world does evolution "tremble" from "we have eyes so we can see"?  It's just an extremely simplifed way of saying we have eyes because we evolved in an environment that made sight helpful to survival. 

Frankly, I don't understand what is "magical" about evolution and natural selection -- they're very practical mechanisms that we can actually see at work in the world around us, in insects with very short lifespans to give just one example.  And I'm still waiting for an answer to Tank's question about why "organism" is a false word. 

To be honest, I think this thread is just a smoke screen for preaching.

Haha

Where is magic here?!!

I ask why and you say because of survival and natural selection and environment.

As if you say exactly it is desire that creates everything!

I debated an evolutionist asking him, why do you have eyes? He said "because we evolve through billions of years.
I said "then if you want to fly, will you?! He said "Yes, but after billions of years of course".  

The same is here, I ask you why you have eyes, you said "in order to see".
Why environment obeys your desire (survival) to see? Why

If nature can selects (this is impossible because nature is rules and rules are mindless), why nature is merciful to work according to your own desire?

Why trees provides you delicious fruits?

Because you desire to eat it in that way?

Why the sun sets?

To let you sleep at night?

Why do you have ears?

Because natural selects and environment felt your desire through its antenna??

If you desire then died and your son desires then died,,,, through billions of years of desires, you can fly?


Evolution the myth

[Sandra Craft]

{snip}

To be honest, I think this thread is just a smoke screen for preaching.

Either that or an example of what an arab/Muslim education system produces, which appears to be quite frankly, horrifying.

What's really frustrating is that I feel we're talking at cross purposes, since nearly everything she writes about evolution has nothing to do with it.  I wish Bruce would jump in on this one -- he's not Muslim but maybe it takes a religious turn of mind to untangle this.

[Tank]

why we have eyes is because we evolved in an environment that made being able to see helpful to survival. 

Thanks brother for your reply.

It's sister, actually.

Man the blind who doesn't know the meaning of sight, dreamt that he can see so he wished, cried alot, environment his mother is so soft and cute and merciful told him, what do you want my baby? Man said, I want to see Mumy although I don't know what does this word mean. His mumy said "Oh babe, as you know nothing is done by itself so we will work together, you tell me what you desire and I execute.

Why do we have eyes, brothers?

Asked and answered, and we at least were courteous enough not to use philosophy and fables which have nothing to do with anything as straight forward as natural selection. 

Yes, this is the only right answer to why, this why from which evolution trembles.

How in the world does evolution "tremble" from "we have eyes so we can see"?  It's just an extremely simplifed way of saying we have eyes because we evolved in an environment that made sight helpful to survival. 

Frankly, I don't understand what is "magical" about evolution and natural selection -- they're very practical mechanisms that we can actually see at work in the world around us, in insects with very short lifespans to give just one example.  And I'm still waiting for an answer to Tank's question about why "organism" is a false word. 

To be honest, I think this thread is just a smoke screen for preaching.

Haha

Where is magic here?!!

I ask why and you say because of survival and natural selection and environment.

As if you say exactly it is desire that creates everything!

I debated an evolutionist asking him, why do you have eyes? He said "because we evolve through billions of years.
I said "then if you want to fly, will you?! He said "Yes, but after billions of years of course".  

The same is here, I ask you why you have eyes, you said "in order to see".
Why environment obeys your desire (survival) to see? Why

If nature can selects (this is impossible because nature is rules and rules are mindless), why nature is merciful to work according to your own desire?

Why trees provides you delicious fruits?

Because you desire to eat it in that way?

Why the sun sets?

To let you sleep at night?

Why do you have ears?

Because natural selects and environment felt your desire through its antenna??

If you desire then died and your son desires then died,,,, through billions of years of desires, you can fly?


Evolution the myth

No person who actually knows about evolution though natural select ever said what I have highlighted, you have unfortunatly been mislead by an ignorent person.

[Sandra Craft]

Haha

Where is magic here?!!

I ask why and you say because of survival and natural selection and environment.

As if you say exactly it is desire that creates everything!

What has desire got to do with evolution?  

I debated an evolutionist asking him, why do you have eyes? He said "because we evolve through billions of years.
I said "then if you want to fly, will you?! He said "Yes, but after billions of years of course".  

I don't think you were talking to a scientist, if he said that, so you may want to take that into consideration.

The same is here, I ask you why you have eyes, you said "in order to see".
Why environment obeys your desire (survival) to see? Why

The environment doesn't "obey" anything.

If nature can selects (this is impossible because nature is rules and rules are mindless), why nature is merciful to work according to your own desire?

Nature doesn't do that.

Why trees provides you delicious fruits?
Because you desire to eat it in that way??

They don't always, you are aware some fruit is poisonous to humans?

Why the sun sets?

Holy crap, do you actually believe that's what happens?  Please tell me that was just a slip.

Why do you have ears?

Same reason I have eyes.

Because natural selects and environment felt your desire through its antenna??

Be honest with me, have you ever read a book on evolution and natural selection, other than one written by a creationist?  Because everything you write, esp. that sentence above, indicates you have no idea what evolution is or how natural selection works.

If you desire then died and your son desires then died,,,, through billions of years of desires, you can fly?

Of course, maybe it's this sentence that indicates you have no idea what you're talking about.

Evolution the myth

Let me ask you this: do you believe that everything that exists now has always existed in exactly this same state, with no change, no adjustment to differing environments, in other words, no evolution?  

[Tank]

Let's have a look at this statement

If nature can selects (this is impossible because nature is rules and rules are mindless), why nature is merciful to work according to your own desire?

Nature is not merciful, far from it, you will die, possibly of an illness possibly in an accident but you will die. I don't suppose Joseph Merrick felt nature was merciful.

You appear to think that organisms chose how they will evolve, this is not so. It is precisely because the rules of nature are mindless that natural selection leads to evolution. There is no choice in natural selection, it is a ruthless rule of reproduction. Individual organisms do not evolve, the gene pool of the organism's species evolves. And it evolves because there are variations between the individuals in the species and some of those individuals have a better chance of reproducing thus changing the mix of genes in the species gene pool in the next generation.

Evolution has no desire or objective or perception, it is the mindless result of natural selection.

HF, you are not identical to your mother or grandmother. Why is this so?

[Stevil]

There are two main issues with this thread.
1: The approach of the thread starter is incredibly condescending
2: The thread starter assumes the Theory of Evolution is dependent on "why"

Science does not look to understand why, science searches for the how.

Why do we have eyes?
A: There was no reason or purpose leading to the development of eyes.

How do we come to have eyes?
A: Being able to react to surroundings has given organisms through the ages, the competitive advantage required to survive. With the random genetic mutations accounting for an almost infinite possibilities, those that advantaged their hosts survived to produce offspring and carry on mutating in the advantageous direction.
Organisms that have evolved appropriately survived, those that didn't died off.

There is no reason or why other than survival. We do not see, because we desired sight. The advantages of being able to sense light, sense movement, visualise objects, visualise details have progressively become more and more important for survival through the ages. There was no conscious thought or desire for sight.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

What's really frustrating is that I feel we're talking at cross purposes, since nearly everything she writes about evolution has nothing to do with it.  I wish Bruce would jump in on this one -- he's not Muslim but maybe it takes a religious turn of mind to untangle this.

Unfortunately, I think you are wasting your time. You will never get a straight answer from Happy, as she simply throws out spiritual sounding "wisdom-sayings" that don't fit in a scientific world view.  She doesn't seem to understand that she could think on two levels - one scientific and one spiritual - and that the scientific world view is not necessarily inconsistent with the existence of Allah.  But Islam is invested in showing that the Qur'an is a perfect book which covers everything in life, and since it doesn't talk about evolution, evolution simply cannot be true.  You are wasting your time if you think you are going to get an actual logical discussion.

[xSilverPhinx]

Yes, this is the only right answer to why, this why from which evolution trembles.

Yes, my intelligent brother. I am here to know the purpose of everything and I want you to answer the why of everything but be sure 100% "why" will uncover evolution.
The more you find yourself try to quit from answering it, the more you become confident that evolution magic holds the freedom of your mind.

Yes, "So that I can see" is the evidence.

OMG I just had a life-changing epiphany I have eyes so that I can see.

***

Since you can't seem to distinguish between science and philosophy, I'm going to ask you:

How could you tell if we're the result of creation or the purpose? And if you want to make your point way more substantiated, don't bring the Koran into it, since people who are not Muslims don't accept it as a holy book anyways. It's pointless to throw around any scripture without really backing it in with more solid evidence.

[Sandra Craft]

You are wasting your time if you think you are going to get an actual logical discussion.

Maybe, tho I did think Tank made some progress in unsnarling this when he pointed out her misunderstanding in thinking that "desire" was considered a part of natural selection.  I'm going to follow this thread awhile longer and see if that helped sort things out, and if not I'll pack it in.

[BullyforBronto]

You are wasting your time if you think you are going to get an actual logical discussion.

Maybe, tho I did think Tank made some progress in unsnarling this when he pointed out her misunderstanding in thinking that "desire" was considered a part of natural selection.  I'm going to follow this thread awhile longer and see if that helped sort things out, and if not I'll pack it in.

This is one of those impossible "conversations." I put the word in quotes because I really don't think that HF is actually reading or understanding anything anyone is writing here, and "conversation" implies the opposite. I kind of dropped out of this when it became apparent that the thread was more about confronting abiogenesis than evolution by natural selection. It's not that I am not open to discuss abiogenesis; it's just that the premise of the post is misleading.

Happy Forever, I hope you prove me wrong. However, up until this point, you have provided nothing more than some weird manufactured rants. If you are going to make a teleological argument as to why evolution by natural selection is a myth, do it already. I'm sure most here can counter any such fallacy. In fact, Tank already did in his simple answer to your loaded question.

You are stuck on the purpose of the eye. Fine. Yes, the eye has a "function." It exists, and we can see. However, it was not created so that we can see. It's a chicken-egg misunderstanding on your part.

Note that I believe that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what's at stake in evolution by natural selection. In order to comprehend some of the arguments that have been presented against whatever it is you're espousing, you must first do a bit of reading outside of your holy book.

[xSilverPhinx]

I'm going to try and explain the difference between Lamarckism and Darwinism as best I again, adding to all the previous attempts of myself and others, in hopes that at least you'll be on the right track and better informed before you go into the whole 'evolution is a myth' thing.

The most well known example, that of the giraffe, because I doubt that you'd try and attach some philosophical question that will misrepresent that what you call a myth in the first place:

Lamarckism: the giraffes want to reach the topmost leaves, so they stretch their necks until eventually they reach it, are able to eat and therefore survive. They pass on the longer neck to their descendants.

Darwinsim: among the giraffes, there are those with shorter necks, medium necks and slightly longer necks. They're born with these variations because they receive half their genes from their mother, half from their father, and complex gene interaction could be at play. Mutations also occur, etc. Variation occurs.
Let's say there's a draught, as is common in most of Africa, and other animal species are already in fierce competition for what's left of the grass. Food is becoming more and more scarce and a lot of animals are fighting for it.
Most of these animals (not restricted to the giraffe species) can't reach tree branches. Some giraffes can, due to the added height between their slightly-longer-than-average necks and legs. Those are able to eat more than the others, and just as importantly, they're able to eat what is less fought for, so there's considerably more food for that group of lucky giraffes.

Those giraffes that are able to reach the bottom branches that others cannot are better able to survive and reproduce. They pass on the genes responsible for the longer necks and legs to the next generation. Within that generation, the frequencies of those genes are higher.

The story repeats itself. Within that generation, there will be those who will be better able to out compete the others. They will pass on their genes to the third generation. Gene pool frequency will go even more in that direction once again.

It's important to know that species (group of animals that are genetically close enough to have fertile descendants) evolve, and not individual organisms. Lamarckism focuses on individuals.

***

One more thing, evolutionary theory does not say that giraffes will give birth to guinea pigs (or any other equally absurd example), for instance. I just thought I should thrown that in there, just in case you, like the majority of creationists, think it does.

[Stevil]

Why does falling toast always land buttered side down?
Why?

You can ask your child if you wish. If you don't have a small child then your neighbour's children will do.
If your neighbours don't have any children then please feel free to ask your partner, if you feel they are juvenile enough.

[xSilverPhinx]

Why does falling toast always land buttered side down?
Why?

It has been revealed to the Wise who in turn have assured us that it's because the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not like his followers eating buttered toast. So much so, in fact, that He will somehow (don't ask - the FSM works in mysterious ways) make sure that it will land on the buttered side.

Maybe major insecurity issues...pictures of false idols have been known to appear on burnt toasts...

I guess the FSM could cause them to spontaneously combust, but that would be too extraordinary.

That's why.

[Siz]

So why, if evolution isn't a myth, are animals made of meat, and food made to grow in trees? And Earth been kept at just the right temperature, and the air made just right for us to breathe?

We've got it all backwards...

[Tank]

What's really frustrating is that I feel we're talking at cross purposes, since nearly everything she writes about evolution has nothing to do with it.  I wish Bruce would jump in on this one -- he's not Muslim but maybe it takes a religious turn of mind to untangle this.

Unfortunately, I think you are wasting your time. You will never get a straight answer from Happy, as she simply throws out spiritual sounding "wisdom-sayings" that don't fit in a scientific world view.  She doesn't seem to understand that she could think on two levels - one scientific and one spiritual - and that the scientific world view is not necessarily inconsistent with the existence of Allah.  But Islam is invested in showing that the Qur'an is a perfect book which covers everything in life, and since it doesn't talk about evolution, evolution simply cannot be true.  You are wasting your time if you think you are going to get an actual logical discussion.

One reason for engaging with people who have a world view like HF is to allow them to illustrate how dangerous theism can be to some people under some circumstances. I had no real inkling that people could behave like this until I got online.

I don't think we will get anywhere with HF today, but if she gets kicked off the board then she can feel she has had some form of victory as we could not answer her comments. We are sowing seeds today and if we are lucky they may well sprout in due course. In addition if one can't defend one's world view with regard to the scientific method then there may well be something wrong with it. Also it's good practice to revisit one's knowledge and learn how to present that knowledge in a calm/rational manner to a hostile audience.