How the Octopus Built Its Own Brain for Better Fishing

CEH ^ | October 25, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

How the Octopus Built Its Own Brain for Better Fishing

--snip--

All we have to do is hand the microphone to some Darwinists and they will proceed to wrap the cord around their necks and hang themselves from the rafters. If you have a better example of Darwinist stupidity in the news, send it in....

[IronKros]

An octopus brain (lower, right) has 50 to 75 lobes and at least as many neurons (about 100 million) as a mouse brain.... And that’s not counting the smaller “brains” in each arm and the still smaller “brains” (ganglia, technically) associated with each sucker. All this neural circuitry gives octopuses exquisite control over their bodies, including some nifty tricks for evading predators, and it has even prompted speculation about cephalopod consciousness.


That is because they where created in HIS image.

Praise the Mighty Cthulhu!

[a fool in paradise]

The octopus also figured out how to get that last bit of mustard out of the bottle.

[Red Badger]

Octopus’s Garden
The Beatles

I’d like to be under the sea
In an octopus’ garden in the shade
He’d let us in, knows where we’ve been
In his octopus’ garden in the shade

I’d ask my friends to come and see
An octopus’ garden with me
I’d like to be under the sea
In an octopus’ garden in the shade.

We would be warm below the storm
In our little hideaway beneath the waves
Resting our head on the sea bed
In an octopus’ garden near a cave

We would sing and dance around
because we know we can’t be found
I’d like to be under the sea
In an octopus’ garden in the shade

We would shout and swim about
The coral that lies beneath the waves
(Lies beneath the ocean waves)
Oh what joy for every girl and boy
Knowing they’re happy and they’re safe
(Happy and they’re safe)

We would be so happy you and me
No one there to tell us what to do
I’d like to be under the sea
In an octopus’ garden with you.

[xcamel]

I’m going with “creationists” and “many suckers” for 200, Alex...

[Wacka]

Don’t even wait to start with the hate. it’s right in the OP.

[ElectricStrawberry]

Ooooo.....something’s intricate....highly developed.....that means Man walked the Earth with 100+ species of large meat eating dinosaurs!!!!

[Natural Law]

" If you have a better example of Darwinist stupidity in the news, send it in....

Apparently the lowly cephalopod is not the one of God's creatures whose small brain is optimized for fishing......

[aruanan]

How the Octopus Built Its Own Brain for Better Fishing

BYOB?

[The4thHorseman]

I’m so glad to see someone mention this ridiculous need to give credit for changes and mutations to species as if it was a conscious decision.

It’s a running joke in my household. Every time we hear about some interesting feature of some animal or plant, either I or my husband will say something akin to “Boy, what a smart ancestor those butterflies had to think of that!” or “Wow, I wish we humans had as smart an ancestor as those seahorses!”

[Natural Law]

In 1877 Charles Peirce outlined four methods for the settlement of doubt, graded from least to most, by their success in achieving a sound fixation of belief:
1) The method of tenacity — persisting in that which one is inclined to think.
2) The method of authority — conformity to a source of ready-made beliefs.
3) The method of congruity or the a priori or the dilettante or “what is agreeable to reason” — leading to argumentation that gets finally nowhere.
4) The scientific method — whereby inquiry actually tests itself and criticizes, corrects, and improves itself.
You have mastered methods 1 & 2, but refuse to accept that method 3 will leave you stuck where you are for another decade or so. Embrace method 4 or forever walk in the darkness, Grasshopper.

[Don W]

Just a post-and-run here, but also a legitimate question:

How do evolutionists reconcile the outgrowth from Darwinian theory (the evolution of species) of incredible complexity arising from simplicity or utter chaos (the big bang) with:

The immutable laws of thermodynamics, where order falls to disorder?

We see everywhere around us the proof of the laws of thermodynamics in everything we see and do. Even at home, if one does not clean up constantly, the place falls into disorder and filth.

Your 4th method might get a bit of a workout here. Forever in darkness indeed, Glasshoppah.

[Natural Law]

"We see everywhere around us the proof of the laws of thermodynamics in everything we see and do."

This is exactly the point that lead me to Theistic Evolution. Evolution requires God's input.

[GodGunsGuts]

Don’t forget about science’s blind spot!

http://www.amazon.com/Sciences-Blind-Spot-Scientific-Naturalism/dp/158743170X

[Natural Law]

"Don’t forget about science’s blind spot!"

Just because someone got a book published on the subject doesn't make it fact. If it did you would have already accepted evolution.

[Mudtiger]

“Evolution requires God’s input. “

Did you arrive at that conclusion by logical means? Do you have good scientific reason to believe this? If so, should this be taught in the classroom as part of evolution?

Not trying to be critical in any way. But I see many posters who believe strongly in evolution but believe that God must have set it in motion or has input as you say. I am just curious as to how theistic evolutionists come to this conclusion. Do they think it “makes sense” (God played a role) based on what they observe in the natural world? If so, would that make it scientific (based on observations in the natural world)?

Sorry for all the questions. For full disclosure, I believe in God, and believe He is the First Cause, and may well be cause for more than that.

[Natural Law]

"Did you arrive at that conclusion by logical means?"

Yes. The only real disagreement between creationists and theistic evolutionists has to do with the process and the time coefficient used. Its abracadabra versus intelligent design. Creationists believe that it all too place in six standard earth days. Theistic Evolutionists believe that there is no such time constraint on God.

[Mudtiger]

“The only real disagreement between creationists and theistic evolutionists has to do with the process and the time coefficient used.”

Thanks for the reply. If the theistic evolutionist position is logical, do you think it should, or at least could, be taught in the classroom as having scientific merit?

[Natural Law]

" If the theistic evolutionist position is logical, do you think it should, or at least could, be taught in the classroom as having scientific merit?"

In a public education context and until there is proof all three options; creation, theistic evolution, and evolution need to be presented in an unbiased way in the context of their origins and their respective strengths and weaknesses. Those who wish for their children to hear (or not hear) a specific option should choose the educational context for their children.

[Mudtiger]

“In a public education context and until there is proof all three options; creation, theistic evolution, and evolution need to be presented in an unbiased way in the context of their origins and their respective strengths and weaknesses. Those who wish for their children to hear (or not hear) a specific option should choose the educational context for their children. “

I would agree with that. Would you agree that it is the adherents to evolution that are blocking the discussion of all three options? In fact, it seems that only one option is allowed by their standards. I do not hear the creationist or the theistic evolutionists arguing to shut down debate and discussion.