Birds, Bees, Butterflies and Flowers

[excreationist]

I'm a little confused here. Are you not an "ex-creationist"?

Yeah I guess I'm leaning towards creationism at this point in time - like intelligent design - and theistic evolution also seems to be a form of creationism.

And I've seen posts from you in the past where you spoke eloquently on science. And yet you are promoting intelligent design now? How in the world can you be an "ex-creationist" if you believe in ID? ID has no scientific data behind it, not theories that can be tested, cannot be falsified, and etc. It's not science. So, have you had a change of heart lately? And if so, what made you change your mind? Or perhaps you're just trying to create controversy?

Well I've come to believe I'm probably in a computer game. Based on my experiences I think I have been in contact with an intelligent force. That means that guided evolution is possible. But maybe the universe was set up in a way that evolution can happen by itself (though that is theistic evolution which still apparently counts as creationism).

 

[excreationist]

Note I used to suspect we could be in a multiverse which would make some form of evolution inevitable....

 

[Bronzeage]

Let's briefly entertain your (idiotic) assertion: How would you be able to tell the difference with evidence we find? The whole universe could have been created last tuesday with our memories and 'history' in our brains.

Exactly... yes I have a theory that the millions of years wasn't real. That way a virtual evolutionary tree could be created easily (rather than literally having guided evolution)
The point of the game is to be "indistinguishable from reality" though there could be some clues of guided evolution

That's not a theory, it's a supposition, of maybe more of a what if.

Here's a question for the evolutionary engineer: Why wait so long to get a tree. Why start with a single celled thing and work up from there, when you could have the finished product on day 1?

 

[excreationist]

.....Here's a question for the evolutionary engineer: Why wait so long to get a tree. Why start with a single celled thing and work up from there, when you could have the finished product on day 1?

Well I believe the intelligent force behind the simulation doesn't want its existence to be obvious:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?21819-A-God-without-compelling-evidence

The millions of years of evolutionary history gives the impression that life could have evolved naturalistically.

On the other hand I think the Bible was written in a way so that it seems there is a lot of evidence for modern YEC:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?20409-Why-YEC-can-seem-plausible

Perhaps the purpose of modern YEC is for believers to sometimes go straight from YEC to atheism and skip what I think could be the actual truth... a young earth with a virtual evolutionary history of hundreds of millions of years....

 

[DBT]

It's getting too complicated. If the world, life and everything looks like a case of natural evolution, it most probably is a case of natural evolution.

 

[Bronzeage]

.....Here's a question for the evolutionary engineer: Why wait so long to get a tree. Why start with a single celled thing and work up from there, when you could have the finished product on day 1?

Well I believe the intelligent force behind the simulation doesn't want its existence to be obvious:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?21819-A-God-without-compelling-evidence

The millions of years of evolutionary history gives the impression that life could have evolved naturalistically.

On the other hand I think the Bible was written in a way so that it seems there is a lot of evidence for modern YEC:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?20409-Why-YEC-can-seem-plausible

Perhaps the purpose of modern YEC is for believers to sometimes go straight from YEC to atheism and skip what I think could be the actual truth... a young earth with a virtual evolutionary history of hundreds of millions of years....

This is almost too silly to warrant a response. You propose an omnipotent all powerful being, creator of the universe, who purposely gives us no evidence of its existence, and your evidence that such an entity exists is that there is no evidence.

 

[excreationist]

This is almost too silly to warrant a response. You propose an omnipotent all powerful being, creator of the universe, who purposely gives us no evidence of its existence, and your evidence that such an entity exists is that there is no evidence.

See:
https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...lling-evidence&p=830602&viewfull=1#post830602

as well as earlier posts in that thread....

 

[excreationist]

It's getting too complicated. If the world, life and everything looks like a case of natural evolution, it most probably is a case of natural evolution.

I'm saying that the simulation can involve deep learning...

Even though the neural network mentioned below is only a fraction as powerful as our brain I think what it can do is incredible - it even learnt to put leaves on the trees.... the concept of a realistic naturalistic world could be the parameters and some example species could be inserted into the calculated evolutionary tree.... it could start with the appearance of the species then reverse-engineer what the DNA could be....

Well that's my thought experiment....

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nvidia-ai-winter-summer-car/

 

[Bronzeage]

Has anyone proposed that our solar system is an atom in the thumbnail of a giant being and we may all have a solar system in our thumbnails, yet?

 

[Worldtraveller]

Let's briefly entertain your (idiotic) assertion: How would you be able to tell the difference with evidence we find? The whole universe could have been created last tuesday with our memories and 'history' in our brains.

Exactly... yes I have a theory that the millions of years wasn't real. That way a virtual evolutionary tree could be created easily (rather than literally having guided evolution)
The point of the game is to be "indistinguishable from reality" though there could be some clues of guided evolution

If there is nothing to distinguish it, then why shouldn't we continue to figure out how it works, based on evidence that is intended to make it look like evolution is a real thing (this makes your supposed AI and asshole at the very least).

Also, you need some falsification criteria. Evolution in this case at least has Occam's razor going for it.

So good job, you completely missed the point. Yet you seem to think yourself clever enough to 'discover' something you think no one else has noticed after thousands of years looking?

 

[excreationist]

If there is nothing to distinguish it, then why shouldn't we continue to figure out how it works, based on evidence that is intended to make it look like evolution is a real thing

Yeah I think there is a coherent evolutionary tree that we could treat as if it had no grand plan... though I suspect it was more "lucky" when creating amazing designs than what normally would have happened... maybe....?

(this makes your supposed AI and asshole at the very least).

Nowhere near as bad as the OT God in this Richard Dawkins quote:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/23651-the-god-of-the-old-testament-is-arguably-the-most
Deception can be seen as playing "hide and seek".

Also, you need some falsification criteria. Evolution in this case at least has Occam's razor going for it.

Well my belief in an intelligent force was mainly from personal experiences that would be seen as coincidences... and there's physics that is compatible with the simulation hypothesis...

So good job, you completely missed the point. Yet you seem to think yourself clever enough to 'discover' something you think no one else has noticed after thousands of years looking?

Well some other people believe in guided evolution... and God not being too obvious - I guess so that it requires faith...

 

[excreationist]

I guess I could just say that I don't understand the evolution of butterflies and flowers, etc, and I am amazed by it... I guess I can't really make further conclusions of whether an intelligent force definitely guided it...

 

[DBT]

Abstract

''The evolutionary success of an organism is a testament to its inherent capacity to keep pace with environmental conditions that change over short and long periods. Mechanisms underlying adaptive processes are being investigated with renewed interest and excitement. This revival is partly fueled by powerful technologies that can probe molecular phenomena at a systems scale. Such studies provide spectacular insight into the mechanisms of adaptation, including rewiring of regulatory networks via natural selection of horizontal gene transfers, gene duplication, deletion, readjustment of kinetic parameters, and myriad other genetic reorganizational events. Here, we will discuss advances in prokaryotic systems biology from the perspective of evolutionary principles that have shaped regulatory networks for dynamic adaptation to environmental change.''

''Environmental adaptation of biological systems can be considered from three evolutionary perspectives: (i) acclimation of existing cellular machinery to operate optimally in a new environmental niche; (ii) acquisition of entirely new capabilities through horizontal gene transfer or neofunctionalization of gene duplications and (iii) reorganization of network dynamics to appropriately adjust existing physiological processes to match dynamic environmental changes. The first type of adaptation can arise through two types of events that differ dramatically in duration.

Simple mutations can greatly increase fitness over very short time frames (within one or few generations). Prominent examples of short-term adaptive events include resistance to drugs (10, 11) and altered nutrient conditions (12).

Alternatively, complex mutations in multiple loci may accumulate over very long time frames, such as the evolution of acidic protein surfaces in halophilic archaea (2, 13, 14). While the initial transfer of adaptive genes by HGT occurs rapidly (15), full integration of laterally transferred component(s) typically occurs over longer time frames (10s of millions of years), where HGT events often require regulatory rewiring to function optimally in the context of existing cellular networks (16). Finally, physiological readjustment occurs both because of genetic and physiological robustness to withstand stress that accumulates over many generations and latent genetic variance that is revealed after environmental perturbation (17).''

 

[excreationist]

Abstract

''The evolutionary success of an organism is a testament to its inherent capacity to keep pace with environmental conditions that change over short and long periods....

I'm more interested in (clear and concise) explanations about how butterflies and bees could have coevolved with the sexual reproduction of flowering plants... and why there seems to be so much complexity, beauty and variety...
like how bees do dances to communicate flower locations, build hexagonal hives, have yellow and black stripes (that some other life forms mimic), have a stinger, etc... maybe if I read/watch a lot I would understand it a bit better....

 

[Valjean]

Abstract

''The evolutionary success of an organism is a testament to its inherent capacity to keep pace with environmental conditions that change over short and long periods....

I'm more interested in (clear and concise) explanations about how butterflies and bees could have coevolved with the sexual reproduction of flowering plants... and why there seems to be so much complexity, beauty and variety...
like how bees do dances to communicate flower locations, build hexagonal hives, have yellow and black stripes (that some other life forms mimic), have a stinger, etc... maybe if I read/watch a lot I would understand it a bit better....

This is basic biology. I'm surprised you didn't study mechanisms like natural selection, sexual selection, &c, in school.
http://talkorigins.org/

 

[excreationist]

This is basic biology. I'm surprised you didn't study mechanisms like natural selection, sexual selection, &c, in school.
http://talkorigins.org/

"....explanations about how butterflies and bees could have coevolved with the sexual reproduction of flowering plants..."

I mean specifics.... not just general mechanisms.... normally in school you'd learn about limited changes in finches or fruit flies, etc. What I'm asking isn't as straight forward as the examples I'd normally learn....

 

[DBT]

Butterflies, bees, etc, and plants co-inhabit the same environment, adapting and evolving in response to their interactions with each other and the overall conditions of their environment. None of them are separate from each other or the conditions under which they live.

 

[excreationist]

Well this web page is pretty good on the flower side of things:

https://science.jrank.org/pages/2761/Flower-Evolution-flowers.html

This looks into issues to do with evolutionary theories and flowers:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141017-how-flowers-conquered-the-world

That is one of the longest scientific articles I've read for a long time. I liked how it used fairly easy to understand language. And it notes current problems people have with their theories. It seems to have a lot of other interesting biology articles there too....

 

[Worldtraveller]

I guess I could just say that I don't understand the evolution of butterflies and flowers, etc, and I am amazed by it... I guess I can't really make further conclusions of whether an intelligent force definitely guided it...

You could, but that would require work, investment in time, learning some biology, and actual effort.

Instead, you say it's 'amazing', throw up your hands and go with your gut.

You sure you're not a trumper?

 

[Treedbear]

Abstract

''The evolutionary success of an organism is a testament to its inherent capacity to keep pace with environmental conditions that change over short and long periods....

I'm more interested in (clear and concise) explanations about how butterflies and bees could have coevolved with the sexual reproduction of flowering plants... and why there seems to be so much complexity, beauty and variety...
like how bees do dances to communicate flower locations, build hexagonal hives, have yellow and black stripes (that some other life forms mimic), have a stinger, etc... maybe if I read/watch a lot I would understand it a bit better....

If there's a God involved directing things it seems like more of a limiting influence than a source of increased complexity and diversity. Think about that. Nothing beats random mutation coupled with natural selection. I think even a God would find beauty in it. It's even being utilized for AI.

ETA - Actually why would beauty even occur to a God. I know why human beings think things are beautiful. They speak to our place in the world. About our survival needs. If I thought beauty was something that came from a God I'd have to believe that God appreciated beauty. But God isn't of this world and so doesn't have those needs. The same thing goes for intelligence. Why would a tri-omni God need intelligence? Intelligent design is a human thing. Trial and error. Discovery. Theorizing. You know, rational stuff that requires a brain.