Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Evolution doesn't design, though.  It selects advantageous features over 
> an extended period of time.  That's entirely different than design.

  Actually evolution is descent with modification. Evolution itself doesn't
select anything. Natural selection does. Evolution is just change.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:55:04 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Evolution doesn't design, though.  It selects advantageous features
>> over an extended period of time.  That's entirely different than
>> design.
> 
>   Actually evolution is descent with modification. Evolution itself
>   doesn't
> select anything. Natural selection does. Evolution is just change.

Neither of those things is design, though.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:52:54 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> It's not a figure of speech, it's an inaccurate statement that those
>> proponents of so-called "intelligent design" latch onto like leeches
>> and say "see, see, there IS a creator!"
> 
>   If you want to have a fun evening, try searching for youtube videos
> "disproving" evolution. You can start eg. with these:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXVNJXu4R1c
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7kJP08fF9w
> 
>   Those are so bad that it's very hard to distinguish them from poes,
> but AFAIK they are being serious.

I've probably seen them before - if they're the ones I think they are, I 
actually became less intelligent after watching them.  Fortunately, it 
was only "temporary stupidity". ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>>> It's not a figure of speech, it's an inaccurate statement that those
>>> proponents of so-called "intelligent design" latch onto like leeches
>>> and say "see, see, there IS a creator!"
>>
>> And I really don't care if those fools want to purposely misunderstand
>> me. They aren't my intended audience.
>
> Propagating a misconception doesn't help all the same.  It's important to
> choose words with care.

Nobody worries for one second about saying things like "Word 
misunderstood what I told it to do". Because very few people are stupid 
enough to believe that a computer program like Word actually 
"understands" anything. Similarly, our language is full of such 
short-cuts, who's meaning is obvious. The only reason we're having this 
conversation is that a few nutcases want to pretend that their invisible 
friend made the universe. Well, that's their problem.

Post a reply to this message

On 16/09/2011 05:52 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 09:03:16 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>
>> Isn't that just the cost to buy another already-existing house of a
>> similar type?
>
> Not necessarily.  Replacement cost sometimes does include construction
> (ie, actual replacement).

I wonder if they ever include relocation costs...

Post a reply to this message

On 16/09/2011 05:20 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/15/2011 3:12, Invisible wrote:
>> (Which is /obviously/ what I asked in the first place, to anybody who
>> actually understands how evolution works.)
>
> The problem is that the actual answer to your question is "mu", the
> answer that unasks the question. The very question you're asking is
> nonsensical, so no amount of disclaiming the phrasing of it is going to
> get you a reasonable answer. I.e., you're asking the wrong question, and
> people are picking on your wording to try to illustrate that the very
> concept behind the question is nonsensical.

*sigh* In Wales there exists at least one field which contains at least 
one sheep, at least one side of which is black. :-P

Would it make you happier if I asked whether the poisonous compounds are 
primary or secondary metabolites? Because that's clearly what I'm 
asking. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 19/09/2011 9:11 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>>> It's not a figure of speech, it's an inaccurate statement that those
>>>> proponents of so-called "intelligent design" latch onto like leeches
>>>> and say "see, see, there IS a creator!"
>>>
>>> And I really don't care if those fools want to purposely misunderstand
>>> me. They aren't my intended audience.
>>
>> Propagating a misconception doesn't help all the same. It's important to
>> choose words with care.
>
> Nobody worries for one second about saying things like "Word
> misunderstood what I told it to do". Because very few people are stupid
> enough to believe that a computer program like Word actually
> "understands" anything. Similarly, our language is full of such
> short-cuts, who's meaning is obvious. The only reason we're having this
> conversation is that a few nutcases want to pretend that their invisible
> friend made the universe. Well, that's their problem.

There is no need to be rude and offensive.

You said:
“It's also clear that, for example, snake venom is "obviously" designed 
to kill the things that snakes eat.”
And
“I'm just wondering whether fungi deliberately manufacture substances…”
Then
“(Which is /obviously/ what I asked in the first place, to anybody who 
actually understands how evolution works.)”

You have had several people telling you that your choice of words, in 
this matter, is imprecise and does not make any real sense. Believe them 
before you make a bigger fool of yourself than is necessary.
Except when people breed things for specific traits, nothing in the 
animal kingdom is designed. Evolution is random, you are anthropomorphising.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>> Nobody worries for one second about saying things like "Word
>> misunderstood what I told it to do". Because very few people are stupid
>> enough to believe that a computer program like Word actually
>> "understands" anything. Similarly, our language is full of such
>> short-cuts, who's meaning is obvious. The only reason we're having this
>> conversation is that a few nutcases want to pretend that their invisible
>> friend made the universe. Well, that's their problem.
>
> There is no need to be rude and offensive.

I wasn't aware that I was. I'm just exasperated that I asked a simple 
question who's meaning is obvious, and yet people are splitting hairs 
over semantic quibbles. (Which I guess just means that nobody actually 
knows the answer... which is cool, I guess.)

> You said:
> “I'm just wondering whether fungi deliberately manufacture substances…”
> Then
> “(Which is /obviously/ what I asked in the first place, to anybody who
> actually understands how evolution works.)”
>
> You have had several people telling you that your choice of words, in
> this matter, is imprecise and does not make any real sense. Believe them
> before you make a bigger fool of yourself than is necessary.
> Except when people breed things for specific traits, nothing in the
> animal kingdom is designed. Evolution is random, you are
> anthropomorphising.

And when I say "it's raining cats and dogs here", I don't /literally/ 
mean that small quadrupedal carnivorous mammals are accelerating towards 
the surface of the Earth due to the local spacetime deformations caused 
by the Earth's immense mass. What I *actually* mean is that we're 
experiencing copious quantities aqueous precipitation in the lower 
troposphere.

People do this ALL THE TIME. Our language is full of phrases that don't 
/literally/ mean what they say, or that say one thing which is really an 
imprecise summary of a much more complicated idea, but everybody 
understands what that idea is so it's fine.

And if that makes me an idiot... well, I guess I'll go sit quietly in 
the corner. I'm almost sorry I even asked.

Post a reply to this message

On 19/09/2011 10:40 AM, Invisible wrote:
>
> I wasn't aware that I was.


Well I for one, don’t like being referred to as a nutcase.

> I'm just exasperated that I asked a simple
> question who's meaning is obvious, and yet people are splitting hairs
> over semantic quibbles.

Therein lies the problem. You think the meaning is obvious and others, 
myself included, read it differently.

> (Which I guess just means that nobody actually
> knows the answer... which is cool, I guess.)
>

I think that you have been given the answer.

>
> And when I say "it's raining cats and dogs here", I don't /literally/
> mean that small quadrupedal carnivorous mammals are accelerating towards
> the surface of the Earth due to the local spacetime deformations caused
> by the Earth's immense mass. What I *actually* mean is that we're
> experiencing copious quantities aqueous precipitation in the lower
> troposphere.
>
Yes that is an idiom which is a colloquial metaphor. Well understood.

> People do this ALL THE TIME. Our language is full of phrases that don't
> /literally/ mean what they say, or that say one thing which is really an
> imprecise summary of a much more complicated idea, but everybody
> understands what that idea is so it's fine.
>

Indeed idioms are fine, a blind friend of mine will say. “I’ll see you 
next week.” Even though he cannot see. The meaning is understood.
The problem here arises with the topic. Using “designed” or 
“deliberately manufacture” implies sentience in the changing of the 
object whether by an internal or external power. Since life forms cannot 
grow or cause their offspring to grow, say bigger teeth or a more 
virulent poison, just by wishing it. That only leaves a godlike power to 
intervene. Hence everyone is picking you up on it.
Has anyone written to say that they agree with you? And assuming that it 
isn’t beat Andrew up, week. Does that not tell you something?

> And if that makes me an idiot... well, I guess I'll go sit quietly in
> the corner. I'm almost sorry I even asked.

I bet you are and you're not. :-P

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>> I wasn't aware that I was.
>
> Well I for one, don’t like being referred to as a nutcase.

Um, I think you'll find that I said that people who believe in ID are 
nutcases. (Unless you think you fit that description...)

> Has anyone written to say that they agree with you? And assuming that it
> isn’t beat Andrew up, week. Does that not tell you something?

Fine. I give up. You win.

Post a reply to this message