Skip to comments.
A Mathematician's View of Evolution
The Mathematical Intelligencer ^
| Granville Sewell
Posted on 09/20/2006 9:51:34 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 681-696 next last
To: js1138
Even a modern American jogger can run a dog to death on a summer day. Dog's can't get rid of the heat fast enough. the same is true of nearly all four-legged mammals.I see your point, but it probably misses a larger truth. Humans would probably be carrying, or escorted by the young, old & infirm. Now from a population standpoint, the canine strategy of pushing their prey makes complete sense. It's the old joke about how fast do you have to run to escape a hungry bear. Answer: faster than you.
You or I may be able to outdistance a single dog, but dogs taking turns sprinting at you, attempting to hamstring you might succeed, since all they have to do is revert to a trot after an individual foray to stay in the hunt. We, on the other had, would have to maintain the pace regardless of injury or exhaustion.
101
posted on
09/20/2006 12:45:02 PM PDT
by
Tallguy
(The problem with this war is the name... You don't wage war against a tactic.)
To: metmom; MineralMan
firs=fire
Spell check doesn't catch it if it's spelled right. *sigh*
102
posted on
09/20/2006 12:47:56 PM PDT
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: metmom
And disadvantages; like sunburn, sun poisoning, exposure, and frostbite. Seems like those would present a greater handicap than the ability to lose heat more quickly in a warm environment only while running.The advantages would be evident on the African Savanna. Whiteness and susceptibility to sunburn is a recent trait.
103
posted on
09/20/2006 12:48:01 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: metmom
No problem. I understood the word. I've made my own mistakes here, spelling-wise.
To: js1138
Wolves raised by humans don't count. They have little fear of humans. Not necessarily.
Woman kills neighbors wolves in self-defense (OH)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1670122/posts
Westmoreland woman found dead in wolf pen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1670057/posts
Woman Killed By Pet Hybrid Wolves
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1668204/posts
105
posted on
09/20/2006 12:55:08 PM PDT
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: metmom
What part of "don't count" are you incapable of reading and understanding. Wild wolves will not attack humans. A caged rabbit is capable of biting you.
106
posted on
09/20/2006 12:58:35 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: Alter Kaker
Evolution is neither random nor designedNot really. Darwinian evolution relies on random mutations as the engine of change. No random mutation, no evolution. NS acts after RM rears its ugly head. Natural selection alone gets you black moths instead of white moths in heavily polluted forests. That's it and for NS to do even that alleles for white and black moths had to be a precondition.
To: MineralMan
Here's a thought experiment. Images of two kinds of crystals. Which ones are the result of natural processes, and which ones could only be the result of design?
108
posted on
09/20/2006 1:10:43 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: js1138
The thought experiment isn't very interesting. All of the crystals are the result of design. Matter as well as life was designed.
To: FreedomProtector
All of the crystals are the result of design. Matter as well as life was designed.Do you have a point?
110
posted on
09/20/2006 1:19:14 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: metmom
To: js1138
Crystallization ain't helping you with Sewells argument. Moving from a higher energy state to a lower energy state is not an "improbable event" since it makes Mr SLOT a happy guy.
To: js1138
Now if you can get the Sun to shine on the fieldstone pile in my backyard and assemble it into that wall I've been meaning to build, you will have thoroughly destroyed Sewell's hypothesis.
To: jwalsh07
So which of the two crystals is necessarily not the result of natural phenomena?
114
posted on
09/20/2006 1:49:55 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: js1138
To: jwalsh07
116
posted on
09/20/2006 2:11:51 PM PDT
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: js1138
Dembski is definitely the Pee-Wee Herman of mathematics. It's fun to watch his web site, wondering what Nigerian email scam he'll fall for next. js1138 - you are an evo-troll. You pop on the thread to spew personal attacks and totally unsupport statements along with childish "victory dances" (when you have added nothing at all whatsoever to the thread)
I am so sick of evos like js1138 trolling these debates with nothing to add but crap.
To: ConservativeDude
"The author of this piece is an idiot, with a diploma from a degree mill, who is such a fool, he probably couldn't even get a job teaching at Bob Jones." Do you actually think you can counter an argument by merely spewing a personal attack? Run along evo-troll
To: js1138
The same point the author of the article was making. The world as we observe it today whether it be the design of crystals or the design of life cannot be logically explained as an accident. The presupposition that matter is all there is and matter (including crystals) and life arrived by accident doesn't fit observed world.
Whether or not some of the crystals in the picture where chiseled by a human, and some where merely mined with a chisel by a human is irrelevant to the point the author makes in the article:
"If a billion engineers were to type at the rate of one random character per second, there is virtually no chance that any one of them would, given the 4.5 billion year age of the Earth to work on it, accidentally duplicate a given 20-character improvement. Thus our engineer cannot count on making any major improvements through chance alone. But could he not perhaps make progress through the accumulation of very small improvements? The Darwinist would presumably say, yes, but to anyone who has had minimal programming experience this idea is equally implausible.
Major improvements to a computer program often require the addition or modification of hundreds of interdependent lines, no one of which makes any sense, or results in any improvement, when added by itself. Even the smallest improvements usually require adding several new lines. It is conceivable that a programmer unable to look ahead more than 5 or 6 characters at a time might be able to make some very slight improvements to a computer program, but it is inconceivable that he could design anything sophisticated without the ability to plan far ahead and to guide his changes toward that plan."
To: Alter Kaker
If the United States is descended from England (via the colonies) then why does England still exist? Because evolution was not the mechanism by which this country was formed - actually there is no relationship at all.
Not only have apes evolved, they have evolved at least as much as humans have evolved.
Do you have any supporting evidence for this claim?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 681-696 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson