Great New AronRa video, Evolution is a fact

[seer]

Nonrandom does not mean "certain". The fact that most beetles are green, and under the same conditions most beetles would be green every time, means there is something very non-random going on. Our challenge here is to get you to acknowledge this. You seem to believe that if ANY component of ANY process is unpredictable, therefore EVERY component is unpredictable. Yet the green beetles will always predominate.

Really phank? Are not the conditions themselves are also random? What if the birds did not eat beetles? What if the niche favored the brown beetle? What if the birds pretty much ate all the beetles? It is because of these random conditions that outcomes are governed by chance and nothing else.

Think of a watershed. The exact pattern of water flow may be due to chance, but the fact that the water always runs downhill is NOT due to chance. So a watershed is the result of both random and nonrandom factors. You seem to think that if you repeat that the shape of the terrain is due to chance enough times, gravity will somehow disappear.

It is a false comparison. No matter which path the water follows (conditions) it will always reach the bottom (outcome). It is not the same for evolution, that no matter the condition we will always have the same outcome (the green beetle surviving).

[phank]

Really phank? Are not the conditions themselves are also random? What if the birds did not eat beetles? What if the niche favored the brown beetle? What if the birds pretty much ate all the beetles? It is because of these random conditions that outcomes are governed by chance and nothing else.

Just because the conditions are unpredictable, doesn't mean that the adaptations to these conditions are unpredictable.

It is a false comparison. No matter which path the water follows (conditions) it will always reach the bottom (outcome).

You are playing games again. There are many many places that might be considered "the bottom", and you can't predict WHICH ONE will be followed. And if there are countless different "outcomes" in the watershed, and countless different "outcomes" in evolution, then the comparison is entirely accurate. You are demanding precise results in one case, and regarding a wide range of results as "the same" in the other case.

It is not the same for evolution, that no matter the condition we will always have the same outcome (the green beetle surviving).

We will always have adaptation to fit the environment. No matter what the environment, no matter what sorts of organisms are adapting to it, they will ALWAYS adapt to fit. That is non-random.

[seer]

Just because the conditions are unpredictable, doesn't mean that the adaptations to these conditions are unpredictable.

No it makes the outcomes dependent on chance conditions.

You are playing games again. There are many many places that might be considered "the bottom", and you can't predict WHICH ONE will be followed. And if there are countless different "outcomes" in the watershed, and countless different "outcomes" in evolution, then the comparison is entirely accurate. You are demanding precise results in one case, and regarding a wide range of results as "the same" in the other case.

I am not playing games phank. The outcome with the water shed is that water will always run down hill. Our outcome (the green beetle surviving) does not necessarily follow since it depends on shifting conditions. That is still by chance.

We will always have adaptation to fit the environment. No matter what the environment, no matter what sorts of organisms are adapting to it, they will ALWAYS adapt to fit. That is non-random.

Really? So a species can never fail to adapt and go extinct instead?

[Jorge]

No, I'm saying if the evolutionists are correct then chance is the governing principle. I don't believe that of course.

Ahhh ... okay.

Yes - absolutely yes! - in Evolution, chance is indeed the "Great Creator". They refuse to accept/admit this because it makes them look stupider than they already are. I wish you "luck" in your efforts to get them to 'fess up.

Jorge

[Jorge]

Jorge,

Are YOU directly a product of chance or design? I mean at the egg and sperm level.

Read my lost comment to seer. I believe this whole thread exhibits a false dichotomy of atheism/ID, with you on the ID side.

K54

It is horrifically frightening that there are "Christians" like yourself running around loose. Your basic knowledge of orthodox Christian theology is appalling! This fact explains why things are going downhill as fast as they are ... the reasons why Old Agers and Theistic Evolutionists have joined forces with Atheists/Humanists to 'take over' our society. Do carry on, Santa Klaus ... can't wait to hear your next screamer.

Jorge

[phank]

No it makes the outcomes dependent on chance conditions.

Yes, this is so. The Las Vegas casinos do not control the roll of the dice, fall of the cards, ball in the roulette wheel. But they know to well within 1% what their take will be on the day's handle. The individual rolls are random, but the odds are very predictable.

I am not playing games phank. The outcome with the water shed is that water will always run down hill. Our outcome (the green beetle surviving) does not necessarily follow since it depends on shifting conditions. That is still by chance.

You are playing games. In the case of evolution, you want one particular specific outcome. In the case of the watershed, you're content with any old outcome so long as it's somewhere downhill. You are equivocating, using different rules to fit your foregone conclusions. This is game-playing.

Really? So a species can never fail to adapt and go extinct instead?

All species eventually fail to adapt and go extinct. But the process of adaptation does not change. Those unable to adapt are replaced with species better adapted. Not at random, BETTER ADAPTED. You know, by design and not by chance.

[seer]

Yes, this is so. The Las Vegas casinos do not control the roll of the dice, fall of the cards, ball in the roulette wheel. But they know to well within 1% what their take will be on the day's handle. The individual rolls are random, but the odds are very predictable.

Good, so we agree that like with individual rolls, individual outcomes are random. So why are you arguing with me?

You are playing games. In the case of evolution, you want one particular specific outcome. In the case of the watershed, you're content with any old outcome so long as it's somewhere downhill. You are equivocating, using different rules to fit your foregone conclusions. This is game-playing.

For ten or so pages phank I have only been speaking of specific outcomes (like why humans are they way they are, or our green beetles). And the fact that natural selection does not remove randomness when dealing with particular outcomes. But given what you wrote above I take it we agree.

All species eventually fail to adapt and go extinct. But the process of adaptation does not change. Those unable to adapt are replaced with species better adapted. Not at random, BETTER ADAPTED. You know, by design and not by chance.

That doesn't follow, the fact is that all species could go extinct.

[HMS_Beagle]

Good, so we agree that like with individual rolls, individual outcomes are random. So why are you arguing with me?

Individual rolls are random. Long term patterns are very predictable.

Why are you still playing these childish word games?

[klaus54]

It is horrifically frightening that there are "Christians" like yourself running around loose. Your basic knowledge of orthodox Christian theology is appalling! This fact explains why things are going downhill as fast as they are ... the reasons why Old Agers and Theistic Evolutionists have joined forces with Atheists/Humanists to 'take over' our society. Do carry on, Santa Klaus ... can't wait to hear your next screamer.

Jorge

Are YOU directly the product of design or chance?

Yes or no?

K54

[phank]

For ten or so pages phank I have only been speaking of specific outcomes (like why humans are they way they are, or our green beetles). And the fact that natural selection does not remove randomness when dealing with particular outcomes.

And everyone has been trying to explain to you that evolution is not directed toward particular outcomes. But that does NOT mean the process is random, because it is not. YOU have been trying to argue that it's ALL random, and in order to make your point you must even argue that DESIGN is random, and SELECTION is random. And if your faith requires that everything is black, you must argue that white is also black. But you seem to be the only person fooled by this pretense.

[seer]

Individual rolls are random. Long term patterns are very predictable.

Why are you still playing these childish word games?

But I haven't been speaking of long term patterns - I have been speaking of specific outcomes, and those are random. We are the way we are by chance alone.

[seer]

And everyone has been trying to explain to you that evolution is not directed toward particular outcomes. But that does NOT mean the process is random, because it is not. YOU have been trying to argue that it's ALL random, and in order to make your point you must even argue that DESIGN is random, and SELECTION is random. And if your faith requires that everything is black, you must argue that white is also black. But you seem to be the only person fooled by this pretense.

You already agreed that the "individual rolls are random, but the odds are very predictable." So when it comes to individual outcomes, they are random. There is nothing predictable about outcomes.

Back on page six I said this:

But are not the environments themselves the result of chance events? And isn't it a chance event that an organism happens to find itself in an environment that selects a specific beneficial mutation? I mean it is possible for a mutation or mutations to have a positive effect in one environment and a negative effect in another environment. So that would be chance also - correct?

[HMS_Beagle]

But I haven't been speaking of long term patterns

The results of selection on a population forms long term patterns.

I have been speaking of specific outcomes, and those are random. We are the way we are by chance alone.

Sorry, the rest of us have been attempting to educate you on actual evolutionary science. Don't let us interrupt your childish word playing.

[phank]

You already agreed that the "individual rolls are random, but the odds are very predictable." So when it comes to individual outcomes, they are random. There is nothing predictable about outcomes.

Which the casinos predict to well within 1%, every single day. Isn't that amazing?

[seer]

Which the casinos predict to well within 1%, every single day. Isn't that amazing?

But you already agree that individual rolls are random. So you agree with me, why do you keep arguing?