It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Krazysh0t
reply to post by PhotonEffect
Nature determines a problem. Then, nature throws a ton of solutions at it to fix it. Because that isn't how it works either.
PhotonEffect
It seems that there is this false sense about evolution being totally random and blind because of it's use of "random mutations" to effect change. But underlying all of that is the actual intent to find that right solution.
What would life be like if environments remained static?
PhotonEffect
You are simply substituting the concept of design with the concept of organize. At least from my arm chair it appears that way...
Perhaps you can clarify the confusion.
GetHyped
Genetic mutation is random. The environmental pressures that allow a favorable mutation to give a tangible benefit to an organism means that evolution itself is not. If a given mutation does not harm an organism but the environment changes to make that mutation favorable, the organisms without that mutation will not be as successful at reproducing so those with it will spread their genes further. There is no intent here, it's just organisms lucking out when the environment changes.
Phantom423
reply to post by PhotonEffect
Our problem as humans trying to understand nature is that we only see a small part of the universe. Most of it is hidden. It wasn't until we had spectroscopy that we were able to dig deeper.
Codes are embedded in this universe - that's my belief (I don't have hard evidence). Simply look at DNA - it's a code - it's mathematical - someday it will be completely elucidated down to all bonding energies and quantum levels. Even then we may not be able to decipher or find the source code. It's a cryptographic/holographic universe!!
originally posted by: EnPassant
I already have but you need to read all my posts. You have been led to believe, as many people have, that the issue is proved but it is not. It is an article of faith that is being presented as true. I am not disagreeing with the fact of evolution, that much is true, but it has not been shown that genes are responsible for the entire organism. Read my posts.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
reply to post by PhotonEffect
I think your view is flawed.
To be honest, I see no rational reason anyone could say a god doesn't exist. An intelligent designer could totally be possible given the knowledge that we currently have.
there is no definitive proof of said god so I see no reason to be able to say that one exists either. But I definitely leave room in the realm of possibility that there is an ultimate creator who uses evolution to develop life.
originally posted by: PhotonEffect
a reply to: GetHyped
Yes that makes perfect sense. However, evolution is often spoken in terms of delivering solutions to problems, even by those who support it. Hence my question about which one comes first (if thats the case). Perhaps it's from a misunderstanding of how adaptation works...
Regardless, random genetic mutation is only a part of the whole picture. We all know that. And even random mutations can still effect the same changes to different and unrelated species in different parts of the planet. So amongst all of the randomness there may be predicability (or patterns) in the process.
originally posted by: EnPassant
I already have but you need to read all my posts. You have been led to believe, as many people have, that the issue is proved but it is not. It is an article of faith that is being presented as true. I am not disagreeing with the fact of evolution, that much is true, but it has not been shown that genes are responsible for the entire organism. Read my posts.