Posted on 09/20/2006 9:51:34 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
Thank you...my back thanks you as well...that will save me so much work and sore muscles.... I will go and build a fire in my backyard tonight. I have a pile of concrete blocks that I have been meaning to assemble into a wall for some time. The light and heat from the fire will surely assemble the blocks into a wall given enough time. Oh wait..if I get some dynamite and make a big bang in my backyard it will assemble the wall even faster. Thank you so much...you saved me so much work!!!!!
Coming up next, a Geologist's view of Neurology
The researchers set up an experiment to document how one particularly complex operation evolved. The operation, known as equals, consists of comparing pairs of binary numbers, bit by bit, and recording whether each pair of digits is the same. It's a standard operation found in software, but it's not a simple one. The shortest equals program Ofria could write is 19 lines long. The chances that random mutations alone could produce it are about one in a thousand trillion trillion.To test Darwin's idea that complex systems evolve from simpler precursors, the Avida team set up rewards for simpler operations and bigger rewards for more complex ones. The researchers set up an experiment in which organisms replicate for 16,000generations. They then repeated the experiment 50 times.
Avida beat the odds. In 23 of the 50 trials, evolution produced organisms that could carry out the equals operation. And when the researchers took away rewards for simpler operations, the organisms never evolved an equals program. “When we looked at the 23 tests, they were all done in completely different ways,” adds Ofria. He was reminded of how Darwin pointed out that many evolutionary paths can produce the same complex organ. A fly and an octopus can both produce an image with their eyes, but their eyes are dramatically different from ours. “Darwin was right on that-there are many different ways of evolving the same function,” says Ofria.
Check out the story of Avida artificial life here.
Artificial evolution is actually a happening area in programming and circuit design because it can sample many variations very rapidly and end up constructing a system that looks really weird to us, but often works better than what we can manage through "intelligent design."
So what is this "third way" you are implying. If something in not designed and not random - what is this third way you are talking about. If selection is not random than who or what is doing the selection? Your statement really makes no sense - are you claiming nature evolved the ability to select? How does nature perform the selection?
Like I said - if it is not random - than who or what does the selecting (please don't say nature)
Natural Selection is an observed process (in the past tense), not a force of power.
So which crystal is the result of natural causes and which one is the result of intervention by a designer?
Are you trying to claim there is no relationship between mathematics and evolution?
BTW: Muir Woods is one of my favorite places.
The environment selects. Like if you don't have the sense to come in out of the rain, you'll get wet, get pneumonia, and possibly die.
What a silly statement!
WOLF ATTACKS ON HUMANS By T. R. Mader, Research Division
Do you just make up stuff on the fly?
Is there an afterlife?
In that afterlife, is there reward and punishment for what sort of life one has led prior to arriving in that afterlife?
Is there a set of objective and binding guidelines for one's behavior in life that determines one's eternal destiny?
If the answers to these four questions are an emphatic yes, as most Americans believe whether in response to divine revelation or to common sense observations, our society must be ordered accordingly with personal altruism being a virtue as most of us believe and not a crime as Ayn Rand and Margaret Sanger believed, a society in which there is recognition of an obligation to enforce objective right and wrong (as even our pagan Greek and Roman forebears agreed), a society structured on principle and reason and not a moral anarchy in which each individual defines morality for himself or herself and devil (dissenters should pardon the expression) take the hindmost, also a society which recognizes that neither government of whatever sort nor the unrestrained individual is or ever can be our highest authority.
Ann Coulter's latest book Goddess, whoops (I must read the title and not just look at the cover picture), that is, GODLESS has a lot of worthwhile fun to poke at those with imagination so limited as to accept Darwin.
Her analysis is far better than my usual one whereby I am willing to concede that Darwinists are descended from apes or whatever so long as they are willing to concede that the rest of us are descended from Adam and Eve via the wonders of God.
How does the environment do ANYTHING - it has no means for selecting or doing anything since there is no thing that is the environment. If there is no intellegent means - its random - how can there be a third way - semi-designed semi-random - it is not possible.
The environment does nothing - it is a label for all things.
There is no selection process - it just happens - random
No force is selecting anything. Selection requires the ability to process data or impose laws to make a selection - this is something the environment can not do.
Natural Select just happens - nothing is driving it.
Natural Select is like God - it just is - you can not falsify natural selection and we cannot use natural selection to predict anything.
Like if you don't have the sense to come in out of the rain, you'll get wet, get pneumonia, and possibly die.
That would be me doing the selecting, not nature. (and I was designed by my Mother and Fathers genes I did not randomly evolve)
Oh, so you agree that natural selection exists, you're just calling it something else.
No, as your article indicates, my statement is fairly common. The majority of incidents in your article were covered in my previous posts -- wolves having no experience with being hunted by humans, wolves in captivity, wolves attacking children or women.
Even so, the number of reported cases is fewer than the number of people killed by lightening. If wolves were commonly hunted, the number would approach zero.
But again, I made a passing remark about wolves while discussing my main point -- that humans can outrun four legged mammals over a long distance. I really didn't intend to advise chasing down large preditors. Or trying to outsprint them.
Common and wrong. Why not do a google before you post an attack on somebody's statement to make sure you got your facts right?
The majority of incidents in your article were covered in my previous posts -- wolves having no experience with being hunted by humans, wolves in captivity, wolves attacking children or women.
The comment was in the context of man a million or so years ago and you have absolutely no idea how wolves acted a million years ago. You really can't spin this into making sense.
Even so, the number of reported cases is fewer than the number of people killed by lightening.
Even so, it makes you "wolves don't attack humans" comment untrue - that was my only point.
The bigger point is you rarely debate - you bully and attack - often with childish name-calling. But often you are wrong - so maybe you should be a little less aggressive, a little less sarcastic, stop falling back on name-calling, and check your facts. (BTW: I am not claiming to be inocent - I am trying to follow my own advice)
I made a passing remark about wolves while discussing my main point -- that humans can outrun four legged mammals over a long distance.
Do you actually think a man can outrun a Cheetah? I did a quick google and found:
The fastest man can run about 18 MPH
A Cheetah runs at about 45 MPH
A wolf can sprint at about 40 MPH
Bears run at about 35 MPH
Lions run at about 35 MPH
While the animal speeds are sprints - Human would never get the chance for long distances because they would be caught in the first moments.
There is no way a human can outrun these animals unless there was a reality TV show where races were staged - then maybe you could have a point although making up the difference on the sprint speeds seems highly unlikely
Do you have any supporting evidence for your claim?
I'm not willing to limit my definition to a couple of phrases, but basically, yes. I find Pascal's wager morally loathsome. Any deity that operated on that principle would be morally indistinguishable from Satan.
Your criticism of Avida and evolutionary algorithms is rather beside the point. Such algorithms are imperfect attempts to mimic nature. There's a lot to learn about how to make a self-sustaining self-replicating system.
Any criticism of evolution based on incredulity needs to recognize that six-sevenths of the history of life on earth is erased by geologic processes -- the first three billion years. The things we claim are descended from a common ancestor are not particularly different in degree of complexity. the cell machinery s pretty much the same in all living things, and the DNA variations are pretty much variations in parameters.
I have never claimed natural selection does not exit - what is your point? And NO, I am not calling it anything but Natural Selection. BTW: you quoted my statement about being designed by my parents - do you think I came into existence via natural selection (directly, not indirectly)?
What is your point?
I concede that Wolves have attacked adult humans. It's rare, and I doubt it would happen often outside of civilization. That was never central to any point I was making.
The top speed of animals is irrelevant to whether a man could outrun them. A human can run continuously for thirty miles. Any fur covered animal will overheat. On the plains of Africa, a human can run down almost anything he is likely to want to catch.
I just realized a giant flaw in my statement above - we also have no idea how fast man could run a million or so years ago.
Oh well.
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.