Another argument that usually comes up in these threads regarding randomness/chance and the production of information, is the monkey typing randomly on a keyboard. It is alleged that a monkey randomly typing will eventually type Shakespeare and all possible information that exits in the universe. This is of course completely false on a couple of accounts.
1) Suppose the monkey happens to type ?? the-red-tree??. Well, was the monkey actually conceptually thinking of the-red-tree when he typed it? No. The conceptual information of the-red-tree is provided by us. The monkey is conveying no conceptual information whatever. ( I suppose you could ask the monkey what he meant by those keystrokes -- and his answer would be ? ?heck, nothin, I was just hittin keystrokes??
).
2) The fact that the monkey hits key sequences that have any meaning at all is only because meaning has been pre-assigned by humans to those symbols, words, or combinations. Give the monkey a new typewriter with 26 new symbols that have no pre-assigned meaning and then see what he types. Nothing - ever. Pure gibberish for infinity with no meaning. Or get the monkey to type 0?s and 1?s randomly, you will find absolutely no information there whatsoever.
One can stack the deck with a normal typewriter and pretend the monkey is producing information. But the reality is chance and randomness don?t produce information.
1) Suppose the monkey happens to type ?? the-red-tree??. Well, was the monkey actually conceptually thinking of the-red-tree when he typed it? No. The conceptual information of the-red-tree is provided by us. The monkey is conveying no conceptual information whatever. ( I suppose you could ask the monkey what he meant by those keystrokes -- and his answer would be ? ?heck, nothin, I was just hittin keystrokes??
). 2) The fact that the monkey hits key sequences that have any meaning at all is only because meaning has been pre-assigned by humans to those symbols, words, or combinations. Give the monkey a new typewriter with 26 new symbols that have no pre-assigned meaning and then see what he types. Nothing - ever. Pure gibberish for infinity with no meaning. Or get the monkey to type 0?s and 1?s randomly, you will find absolutely no information there whatsoever.
One can stack the deck with a normal typewriter and pretend the monkey is producing information. But the reality is chance and randomness don?t produce information.
No one who understood evolution would compare it to a random process. It's called natural selection for a reason.
Let's keep the bag, but to be analogous to the discrete base-4 coding of DNA, let's fill it with a discrete form of data, say Scrabble letter blocks. Let's say our goal is to get the Lord's Prayer, so we'll pick out the appropriate number of blocks and see what we get. If you picked a random set of 292 blocks each time randomly, it would take you 55 (26 uppercase, 26 lowercase, comma, space, and period) to the 292 (number of characters in the prayer) power tries, which is about 10 to the 510th power attempts.
On the other hand, if you applied selection, by keeping the blocks that matched from every pick, you could do it in around 10,000 tries. Evolution is based on natural selection, not randomness, and that 10 to the 506th power factor increase in selection in this simple example shows how selection produces results than randomness never could.
I cited an entire bibliography of scientific articles. Your mention of creationist ramblings on the web is in no way comparable to my citations of peer-reviewed articles in well known science journals like Nature and Science.
Two problems:
1. Newton's 1st law is not the entire content of classical mechanics.
2. Even if it was, while Newton's classical mechanics is a good enough tool for everyday events, classical mechanics is no longer our best theory for how objects move and interact. That's quantum mechanics.
I think one of the most important ways God manifests himself other than through his guided messengers and prophets is throught he design in nature. Check out this site:
http://www.harunyahya.com.
More specifically, these pieces:
Not by chance
The Design in Nature
Design in Nature
http://www.harunyahya.com.
More specifically, these pieces:
Not by chance
The Design in Nature
Design in Nature
Only on a tiny scale. When we're talking about really big objects (orbiting planets, what have you), Newton's laws are our best bet. Unless it's moving really fast, in which case relativity comes into play.
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,402
- 8,574
- 126
light wouldn't have to go through several layers of cells before it is picked up by photoreceptors. the nerve wouldn't come through the middle of the eye, leaving a large blind spot. an optical engineer could probably come up with a much better critique.
Put the retina on the right way around, and thus eliminate the human blind spot.
Squid have it right, and so have no blind spot as we do.
He's talking about motion starting at the first nanoseconds of the universe. That is the scale where quantum mechanics and relativity come into play.
For every thing that you think isn't quite right, and thus pointing towards evolution, I can name a million that are perfect. Shall I list some;
The heart
the digestive tract
the brain
need I go on?
I can't claim to have researched this, but I'm sure there's some reason this 'error' exists.
That's odd, I see the overall picture and dont' feel the way you do. Unlike you, however, I've made & backed up points, so at least have a little credibility. Sticking your jaw out and insisting you're right "just because" doesn't get you very far here. Try some NASCAR forums perhaps.
What does this have to do with a deity or evolution?
Grasping at straws?All of those could be improved, so they're obviously not perfect. For example, the brain has a much more primitive immune system than that of the rest of the body, because the blood brain barrier have prevented it from experiencing the same selective pressures as the immune system of the rest of the body. Infections that reach the brain are much more likely to be fatal due to the brain's immune system overreacting in ways than the immune system of the rest of the body wouldn't. On a functional level, the working set of short term memory is about 7 +/- 2 items, which is rather small and could be improved to make complex mental tasks easier to perform.
If they didn't work we wouldn't be here debating it. Those for whom they don't work are eliminated from the gene pool (though modern medicine is countering this on a small scale, and mostly only for our species). Until any of you can come up with a better argument than 'it must be so', I'll continue laughing at your rambling and incoherent attempts at proving a point with emotion.
The genetic variation already exists in the species so the natural selection isn?t producing anything that wasn?t there already. The only thing natural selection ?selects? is one of the already existing genetic variants. This is light years away from explaining how new structures and species are produced, which is required for evolution.
That?s ?our? ?YOUR goal. The random process is not producing any cognitive information. You have the information and are reading it into a randomly produced sequence. Re-read my blurb on the typing monkey -- a random process doesn?t produce information.
No problems -- Newtons 1st law of motion is still valid whether interpreted in a classical or relativistic framework.
It has everything to do with a deity. Well, unless you believe (in magic) ? ie. ?that matter popped into existence for no reason at all and from nothing -- all by itself. And lots to do with evolution in the sense that God decided the physical and chemical laws of the universe. And that humans have a spiritual soul.
quakefiend420
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2004
- 14,685
- 1
- 76
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter