Re: The Tree of Life

On 26 Jun, 18:36, Sam Wilson <Sam.Wil...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1182877770.688635.117...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,



Ian <ian.gro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 26 Jun, 15:21, Sam Wilson <Sam.Wil...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1182864554.171786.142...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

Because the opposite of "by accident" is "by natural selection".
Creationists persist in claiming that evoloution is a random process,
ignoring, forgetting or simply failing to understand the power of
natural selection.

Uhhh... but the point is that natural selection IS random. The point
about the Blind Watchmaker is that there is no watchmaker, or at least
no intentionality about making a watch. Don't get all anthropomorphic
on us.

You're confusing, or maybe conflating, two things. It's only the
genetic mutations which are random - the process of natural selection
is what follows on, and hugely improves the efficiency of the
process.

Some interesting work as been done on evolutionary models of circuit
deisgn, in which components are randomly assembled and then tested.
Promising candidates - ones which behave /a bit/ like an amplifier say
- are then taken as the basis for further mutation. Some rather nice
designs emerge - with nobody intending to do anything.

Uhhh again - have I misunderstood what you're describing? What or who
decides that circuits like an amplifier are selected?

An entirely automated testing system which injects a signal into the
input (it's all done in simulation, of course, but the principle's the
same) and has a look at what comes out. Absolutely no intelligence at
all required!

It sounds like
you've just described evolution with an intelligent designer whose
intention is to create an amplifier! That's exactly *not* like what
evolutionists are supposed to believe.

Not at all. Natural selection runs automatically, just like the
circuit tester. No designer needed in either case. Of course you then
get into another level: the circuit testing machine used for these
experiments was intelligently designed, so was the process of
evolution created by an intelligent being? That, of course, is exactly
*not* like what creationists are supposed to believe.

The ideas that evolution is purely random, ...

What's *not* random about it?

The natural selection part, as I was trying to say before. There are
two components: genetic mutation (which is random) and the selection
of the fittest from what results (which isn't random).

Here's an example. Supposing I give you ten coins and ask you to
jumble them up in your pocket and lay them down at random until you
get ten heads in a row. That's random, and it will probably take you
an awful lot of goes, since only one in the 2^10 possible sequences is
correct.

Now I let you lay them down, and only re-randomize the tails each
time. You'll get to the end result an awful lot quicker. It's not a
purely random process, it's an evolutionary one.

Douglas Adams' (or was it Dawkins'?) example of a puddle exactly fitting
its hole in the road only works because of gravity, intermolecular
forces and thermal movement of molecules. That's all pretty random and
without intention and that's the sort of thing I had in mind.

My favourite verson ofthat is Harry Hill's observation that it's very
convenient for cats to have two little hole in their fur just where
the eyes go.

As far as a puddle fitting into its hole goes, that too needs a non-
random process, gravity, to select the shape. Seen what happens to a
puddle in free-fall - in a space station fo exmple? Doesn't fit into
the hole any more.

Ian
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Beliefs and Theories
    ... Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution is this view remains based on the ... i.e. a non random process is not also required. ... heritable variation on which non random natural selection can act. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Beliefs and Theories
    ... Theory of Molecular Evolution is this view remains based on the ... random process is not also required. ... non random process can only be natural selection because no other has ... What is the non random process on which Neutral Theory remains dependent? ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE
    ... > on some of the processes other than natural selection that cause ... Mutation causes evolution. ... without a non random process. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Non-Coding DNA preserved by genetic drift?
    ... For Darwin it was natural selection. ... While natural selection remains a refutable non random process, ... provide _either_ random OR non random patterns. ... For evolutionary theory to redeem itself it has to "reinvent" the difference ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: The Tree of Life
    ... Creationists persist in claiming that evoloution is a random process, ... but the point is that natural selection IS random. ... about the Blind Watchmaker is that there is no watchmaker, ...
    (uk.religion.christian)