|
|
Post by admin on Apr 23, 2013 11:29:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by nosorog on Apr 23, 2013 12:59:49 GMT -8
Clark,
What did you find INTERESTING about this article? %-()
Alex
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Apr 23, 2013 14:57:08 GMT -8
Clark, What did you find INTERESTING about this article? %-() Alex I find the entire subject of evolution very interesting, especially now that DNA comes into the picture. DNA must be important because it sure screwed up the whole nomenclature of butterflies! Oy veh! I am not a 'creationist' though. I figure if there is a God, he started simple and then built up to the complex, just like any artist would when creating a painting or sculpture. There is always 'time' between cause and effect, as we can see around us. Formation > growth > perfection. The timeline outlined in Genesis for the creation of the universe is obviously symbolic. "Where do we come from?" is probably the biggest mystery of life. That is what I find interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by nosorog on Apr 23, 2013 15:58:54 GMT -8
The subject is interesting but the referenced articles is just speculations and fact twisting.
Did DNA "screwed up" butterfly nomenclature or straighten it up?
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Apr 23, 2013 16:48:47 GMT -8
'screwed up' because I have to re-learn everything I grew up with (I'm from the old school). I mean, who would have thought that a monarch butterfly would end up as a Nymphalid?  |
|
|
|
Post by jshuey on Apr 24, 2013 5:48:25 GMT -8
Two Things.
The article about fish feet is just stupid. If it's on the internet - then it must be true - right? I think the author doesn't have a clue about "genetic switches" or perhaps no idea what the term homology means.
Second - I think Paul Ehrlich suggested that Monarchs were nymphalids back in the 60's - along with satyrs, morphos and brassolids. Taxonomic flux is not anything new...
Shuey
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Apr 24, 2013 7:44:22 GMT -8
Maybe monarchs is not the best example. Just can't remember off the top of my head the other changes. I'm just being grumpy.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingedwishes on Apr 26, 2013 16:45:22 GMT -8
I understand what you meant Clark. Fish names are just as morphing as leps. I spent alot of time learning the Latin names of Tanganikan cichlids only to learn that they were restructured soon after I learned them. At least when someone tells me its neolamprologus instead of lamprologus (sp?) I can reply that I was "old school."
|
|
|
|
Post by Zacatak on May 5, 2013 1:27:53 GMT -8
hi clark, i like your thoughts on creation even though your not a creationist as you mention. the beauty in nature is far too complex to be without a designer. you wouldn't look at a beautiful painting and say nobody painted that painting, because your reaction to it would be to say behind that painting was without a doubt an artist. and the whole big bang idea wouldnt make sense too because think of the water cycle how perfect that is, right down to the connection between plants and animals, some flowers need to be pollinated and without a doubt their is always something that is connected with that flower..in one instance a moth with a very long tounge to reach deep inside. and if something has a purpose it needs to be well thought out. something happening by chance is not likely im sure many would agree. i do believe in a god, and to be honest his name appeared in the bible over 7 thousand times before it was removed by thousands of years since the bible has been updated and changed. it was replaced with such titles as Lord and God and his name appears on temples and ancient artifacts that have been found, even coins where it in appears in hebrew as YHWH, translated into english that bears the name Jehovah
|
|
|
|
Post by nomihoudai on May 5, 2013 1:54:58 GMT -8
As an artist is able to draw a self-portrait only if he himself exists nature is able to exist and change based upon nature itself.
God is a collective term referenced to by humans for things they do not understand. You seem to not understand a lot of things. Go educate yourself first, but let me warn you, it is a tough road you are heading for as you need to employ your own brain. A thing many people are either afraid of, or too lazy for.
p.S. Lol @ your use of the term "beauty", giving quick reference to Hume: "Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them."
|
|
|
|
Post by Zacatak on May 5, 2013 1:57:26 GMT -8
one of my favourite scriptures  (Revelation 4:11) “You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created.” |
|
|
|
Post by nomihoudai on May 5, 2013 2:22:00 GMT -8
You know my favourite one?
Ignorance is bliss.
You have sentences like yours in every world religion, go figure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zacatak on May 5, 2013 2:29:36 GMT -8
im aware everyone will have their own opinions, just as i have mine. im not educated in much nor am i wanting to debate over the issue. i just see things from how i see nature in general. i read about the illustration of the sea turtle for instance, it begins its life on the beach, may travel the earths sea's for years. yet it is still able to find its way back to the very beach it was born...that is truly amazing! can chance or evolution give such a animal such wisdom? if someone asked a human to do the same thing, we would need a gps or a compass, or follow the stars to do the exact thing the turtle can do.. scientists are now turning to nature for the answers to their incredible feats to solve problems. if you had a bucket of balls and you had 10 blue balls, and 10 yellow balls, you tip the bucket over. what are the chances you will have all those 10 blue balls fall out of the bucket with only the yellows remaining? you would say its impossible to get it perfect without at least one of those yellow balls escaping. and you can liken it to the water cycle, not one thing is missing or is imperfect. for that to fail it would be the end of life as we know it...could that have just happened, or did it have a purpose....we know it has a purpose because it benefits us humans and all animal life.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomihoudai on May 5, 2013 3:21:06 GMT -8
The reason why I replied to your first post is that you promulgated a view that I strongly oppose. It had nothing to do with god, it was because you were reasoning that you don't understand something, and therefore it must be magic or some crazy out of this world thing.
We exist, that is an observable thing. We need the water cycle as it is. Both things explain one another. We are because the physics of this universe left the possibility for self replicating entities open, no magic involved.
Your examples of the coloured balls are simple physics and math, the solution depends on the boundary conditions you set. The turtle is amazing, but it has evolved in such a way to find it's way back. Either by chemical concentrations in water or Earth's magnetic field. If the turtle couldn't find its perfect nesting habitat back it would just die out. Humans don't have this power. They are not linked to a precise habitat, if they migrated they had to and they didn't need to find the old habitat back. Again, no magic.
The world is marvellous, but there is no magic in it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2013 9:48:42 GMT -8
"Humans don't have this power. They are not linked to a precise habitat, if they migrated they had to and they didn't need to find the old habitat back"
no they find a space and cover it in concrete.
|
|
(Revelation 4:11) “You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created.”