Grass can't see a lawnmower coming, and run

[Iamme]

So what else is new, eh? Actually this is rather interesting. Just like my other threads where I try to instill the belief that a higher power could very well be behind everything,... once again, the case may apply here.

Grass, trees...any organic life that is not classified as a 'creature', is basically stationary, rooted, and without the senses that creatures enjoy. Why is that? Why the split in evolution that causes such a dissimilarity. This is a MAJOR split.

Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?

Interesting thought, isn't this? One MORE thing that happens to be 'lucky' for us? Of all the things I have said about 'luck' in my one recent thread in Science, about the 6+ trillion cells in the human body, this then would be more 'luck', for us?

I can hear the argument now: 'What about cows, deer, etc. We eat THEM! THEY can run.' True. But don't some of you believe that, in the beginning, man was not designed to really eat meat? That we were designed to eat the things the earth provided as stationary?, such as fruits, berries, nuts, grains, etc.? But even so, let's say that we also WERE designed to eat creatures that could try to flee from their pursuer, perhaps this was 'allowed', at least later, based on the fact man was given a brain to be able to catch that which could escape us. But we were given those other things, those stationary things, to eat, that do not sense us, and therefore will not escape us, because this way there could almost certainly then be guaranteed a food source for God's highest creation, by method of farming... an ability to grow food individually, in gardens, as the intent in the Bible's 'Garden of Eden 'story'.

But this is not just a food issue. It is also a clothing issue, a housing issue, a ground cover issue (the lawnmower bit...could you imAGine if grass would see us coming?, and get up and run off the soil?). So, our Earth as we know it, and of which we so harmoniously fit in with, would not work right, if everything was created with senses! Luck, once again?, or design?

This is the kind of stuff I think about when I lay in bed and can't sleep right away.

Just a thought.

[plumjam]

(the lawnmower bit...could you imAGine if grass would see us coming?, and get up and run off the soil?).

Imagine how much bigger the astro-turf industry would be.

It could also lead to the first politically correct forms of hunting.

[-Fran-]

This is the kind of stuff I think about when I lay in bed and can't sleep right away.


My advice is that you wait until you are much more tired before you go to bed :)

[plumjam]

My advice is that you wait until you are much more tired before you go to bed :)

If grass ran away Iamme could chase it about a bit every night before going to bed. Problem solved. :)

[-Fran-]

If grass ran away Iamme could chase it about a bit every night before going to bed. Problem solved. :)

Chasing the grass, is that something like Chasing the dragon? Half of the time reading Iamme's threads I am pretty sure he's "chasing the grass" already :)

[Sefarst]

I can hear the argument now: 'What about cows, deer, etc. We eat THEM! THEY can run.' True. But don't some of you believe that, in the beginning, man was not designed to really eat meat? That we were designed to eat the things the earth provided as stationary?, such as fruits, berries, nuts, grains, etc.? But even so, let's say that we also WERE designed to eat creatures that could try to flee from their pursuer, perhaps this was 'allowed', at least later, based on the fact man was given a brain to be able to catch that which could escape us. But we were given those other things, those stationary things, to eat, that do not sense us, and therefore will not escape us, because this way there could almost certainly then be guaranteed a food source for God's highest creation, by method of farming... an ability to grow food individually, in gardens, as the intent in the Bible's 'Garden of Eden 'story'.

You've refuted your own argument at this point. Not only is half our diet made up of things that can see us and run away, but early man would have also used those pelts for clothing, Native Americans used them for housing, bones for tools, etc. Only recently, after we switched to agrarian societies did this change. And plants' inability to be conscious and move around has led to terrible famines, forest fires, and so on because they couldn't get away from the fires or move to areas with more water.

[Nogbad]

So what else is new, eh? Actually this is rather interesting. Just like my other threads where I try to instill the belief that a higher power could very well be behind everything,... once again, the case may apply here.



No it couldn't but there is a certain car crash amusement in reading the posts.

[Gate2501]

Breaking News!

Scientists today have abandoned the theories of Evolution, Abiogenesis, and anything else that gave a natural explanation for our place in the world/universe. The reason for this turn of events was a stunning breakthrough by a little known researcher on the Internet. In a fit of intellectual might, this rogue thinker came to a startling realization... NUTS AND BERRIES DO NOT RUN AWAY!

Why wouldn't the nuts and berries run from an obvious predator!? It isn't like they evolved to be delicious so that animals would eat them and their seeds, and crap them out so that more plants would grow. Even Dawkins has been quoted as saying "My God... hes right, I ate a peanut and it totally didn't try to get away from me!"

Science has been turned on its head.

[JoeEllison]

This is the kind of stuff I think about when I lay in bed and can't sleep right away.
Yes, well, it is very obvious. After awhile, you being to realize why you don't have those thoughts during the day: because they aren't meaningful when you really think about them.

[Tubbythin]

Grass, trees...any organic life that is not classified as a 'creature', is basically stationary, rooted, and without the senses that creatures enjoy. Why is that? Why the split in evolution that causes such a dissimilarity.

Why not? With all the different possible evolutionary pathways available to an organism on Earth, its not particularly surprising that some are stationary.


Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?

Interesting thought, isn't this? One MORE thing that happens to be 'lucky' for us? Of all the things I have said about 'luck' in my one recent thread in Science, about the 6+ trillion cells in the human body, this then would be more 'luck', for us? [\QUOTE]

To me you have things completely backwards. You seem to be saying:
"We are here and the conditions are just right for us therefore the universe/Earth was designed for us."

I think
"The universe/Earth exist and conditions are just right for us therefore we are here."

It is only your view that fundamentally requires a designer.

[Quote]
But we were given those other things, those stationary things, to eat, that do not sense us, and therefore will not escape us, because this way there could almost certainly then be guaranteed a food source for God's highest creation, by method of farming... an ability to grow food individually, in gardens, as the intent in the Bible's 'Garden of Eden 'story'.
Ok, well we agree on one thing - if plants didn't exist, we wouldn't either. But thats not to say nothing would. I don't know of any particular reason to assume that if there were no stationary organisms there'd be no organisms at all. In fact, nowhere would the phrase "survival of the fittest" be more appropriate.


So, our Earth as we know it, and of which we so harmoniously fit in with, would not work right, if everything was created with senses! Luck, once again?, or design?

What I think you mean is "Would not work out right for us". I'm sure there are a lot of creatures on Earth for whom the world would be more "right" if we weren't on it.

[Empress]

Breaking News!

Scientists today have abandoned the theories of Evolution, Abiogenesis, and anything else that gave a natural explanation for our place in the world/universe. The reason for this turn of events was a stunning breakthrough by a little known researcher on the Internet. In a fit of intellectual might, this rogue thinker came to a startling realization... NUTS AND BERRIES DO NOT RUN AWAY!

Why wouldn't the nuts and berries run from an obvious predator!? It isn't like they evolved to be delicious so that animals would eat them and their seeds, and crap them out so that more plants would grow. Even Dawkins has been quoted as saying "My God... hes right, I ate a peanut and it totally didn't try to get away from me!"

Science has been turned on its head.

...giggling furtively to avoid hurting iamme's feelings...

[Earthborn]

Grass, trees...any organic life that is not classified as a 'creature', is basically stationary, rooted, and without the senses that creatures enjoy. Why is that? Why the split in evolution that causes such a dissimilarity. This is a MAJOR split.Yes, it is a major split, and it shows that the way evolution is often presented is somewhat problematic. Usually evolution is presented as "the survival of the fittest" where "fittest" is defined as the survival strategy that is most adapted to the environment.

This way of presenting it is problematic, because for any environment there are at least two (and often many more) viable survival strategies. All those will result in creatures that are well adapted to their environment and have a chance to survive and reproduce. There is always more than one way to adapt to your environment.

The split you mention is a very fundamental one that must have occured quite early during evolution. Ask yourself this: in an environment where food is scarce, what is the most effective strategy for survival; sit still and use as little energy as possible, or expend more energy searching harder for food? Both are viable strategies, and the ancestor of plants and animals produced some descendants that were "lazier" and used little energy and may have became the ancestors of plants, and some descendants that were more active and may have became the ancestors of animals. Creatures that used lots of energy while not searching harder for food must have died out.

[Ladewig]

So what else is new, eh? Actually this is rather interesting.

In a way, it is interesting. But please note, just because the idea is interesting does not mean your conclusions are accurate. You have a natural curiosity that can serve you well. I would suggest taking some classes in logic or philosophy or natural science. They may help you channel your imaginings into helpful or insightful thoughts.

Also interesting (but not evidence of a designer): some plants eat animals.

[Ladewig]

Also note that even if fruit-bearing bushes were sentient and had limited mobility, they would not necessarily run away from humans. The goal of a plant (if there really is a goal) is to pass on its genes. Humans (and other fruit eating animals) will take the fruit away from the plant and discard the seeds in another location. Plants like the idea of their seeds being brought to places they cannot reach on their own.

[neltana]

Plants like the idea of their seeds being brought to places they cannot reach on their own.

They also hate it when you anthropomorphize them.

[this charming man]

A sloth is a creature that cannot run away; when climbs down to the forest floor to deficate(once a week or so), it is very vulnerable to predators.

Seems very unfair of an intelligent designer to make a sloth that way.

[Nihilus]

Personally, I find Ray Comfort's Banana Theory (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4179187006499355372&q=ray+comfort+banana&total=33&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2) to be the most compelling. It's so clear how everything "fits" thanks to his example.

:)

[Hokulele]

If plants were designed for our use, why are so many of them poisonous?

[Nihilus]

If plants were designed for our use, why are so many of them poisonous?
God works in mysterious ways. :D

[RichardR]

Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?
Unlikely. Or the designer was incompetent - since he forgot to design humans with a digestive system capable of digesting grass. Either way, the theory of evolution is more consistent with the facts.

[Minarvia]

If plants were designed for our use, why are so many of them poisonous?

There are more uses for plants than just eating them. :D

[Hokulele]

God works in mysterious ways. :D


You know, I think it would be better proof that some kind of god did exist if grass did run away from my lawnmower. Just think of all the hours I would save each weekend if I didn't have to do yard work.


ETA: Minarvia, hah!

[plumjam]

A sloth is a creature that cannot run away; when climbs down to the forest floor to deficate(once a week or so), it is very vulnerable to predators.

Seems very unfair of an intelligent designer to make a sloth that way.

Serves it right for being a sinner.

[this charming man]

Serves it right for being a sinner.

A deadly sinner! :D

[Ladewig]

They also hate it when you anthropomorphize them.

Yes, I am quite aware of the limitations of my analogy. I was trying to illustrate that some plants have evolved in such a way as to make their seeds attractive to animals.

. . . . . . .
So, may I felineomorphize them instead?

[Iamme]

You've refuted your own argument at this point. Not only is half our diet made up of things that can see us and run away, but early man would have also used those pelts for clothing, Native Americans used them for housing, bones for tools, etc. Only recently, after we switched to agrarian societies did this change. And plants' inability to be conscious and move around has led to terrible famines, forest fires, and so on because they couldn't get away from the fires or move to areas with more water.

Ahhhh,...the poor things. Well, I guess we have always had to take the good with the bad. Fire is a case in point. It is both our friend and fo.

If God, the Universe...all of creation is circular, with no true beginning (the Big Bang may not have been a true beginning, for that probably came from something) or end, and where something and nothingness might be bridged in some circular logic...the somewhere in that circle is alway going to be a halfway point. That is why there is fire and water, hot and cold, hard and soft, a north pole and a south pole (and magnets display this circular motion of eternalness, probably to be a testiment to the workings of God. Ever try to figure out which is the starting point in the magnet?), even love and hate.

[Gate2501]

Ahhhh,...the poor things. Well, I guess we have always had to take the good with the bad. Fire is a case in point. It is both our friend and fo.

If God, the Universe...all of creation is circular, with no true beginning (the Big Bang may not have been a true beginning, for that probably came from something) or end, and where something and nothingness might be bridged in some circular logic...the somewhere in that circle is alway going to be a halfway point. That is why there is fire and water, hot and cold, hard and soft, a north pole and a south pole (and magnets display this circular motion of eternalness, probably to be a testiment to the workings of God. Ever try to figure out which is the starting point in the magnet?), even love and hate.

You know, there are forums on the web where various groups: potheads, *shamans*, religious twits, you name it... They sit around and talk about stuff just like this.

I have no idea why you post this silliness on a forum for skeptics. You posit an idea, and your idea gets shredded to bits, so you post again with this which I have quoted. You effectively said nothing at all in this quote. It can be summed up as "The universe is circular, and that is why things are the way they are, and that is evidence of god."

Utter mindless rubbish.

[Iamme]

Why not? With all the different possible evolutionary pathways available to an organism on Earth, its not particularly surprising that some are stationary.

It's actually ALL surprising. It's all quite marvelous. Marvelous that it isn't so much that we can survive from what is provided. The fact it goes WAY beyond survivability. Take our ability to converse with each other via the medium we are on right now. Or see news from around the world. Or fly there. Or fly into outer space so we can look back on the place we are from.

Originally Posted by Iamme

Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?

Interesting thought, isn't this? One MORE thing that happens to be 'lucky' for us? Of all the things I have said about 'luck' in my one recent thread in Science, about the 6+ trillion cells in the human body, this then would be more 'luck', for us? [\QUOTE]

Originally posted by Tubbythin

[QUOTE]To me you have things completely backwards. You seem to be saying:
"We are here and the conditions are just right for us therefore the universe/Earth was designed for us."

Yes, I am sayng that due to the fact of what I said in my first response. If evolution was something at work ONLY for survivability, I could understand perhaps why none of you would want to dig any deeper than that. But when you consider that not only are there things such as oranges with sections made for bite-sized non-messy eating, and totally non-biological things that asssist us in spectacular ways (take the principles of leverage), photography, the radio and light wave spectrum of radio, tv, x-rays, microwaves,...all kinds of stuff that are of imMENSE value to us, ...this all makes it appear that there must have been some plan art work from the very beginning.

Because there was stuff to see, we were made to see. Because there was stuff to hear, we were made to hear. Because there was stuff, to feel, we were made to do so. Because there were things to smell, we were made to be able to. Because there was things to taste, we got that ability to.

What commanded these things to happen? PLEEEEAAASE don't tell me that say our taste buds occured because creatures that had them as opposed to creatures who did not have them, went on to survive better. Spare me that one. Tell me how the taste bud started from nothing. Draw it out on paper for me. Tell me how our hearing started and how all the parts started evolving into the complexity it did.

Now, one could argue that even a God did it SOMEhow. So that unless God all poofed it here, so we'd all have eyes, hearing, taste, smell, feel...then how did GOD do it? Good question, I just asked myself in advance, eh? (I have to think defensively you know). Well, I'm not big on believing in the poof theory either. Somehow it happened, but with reason. I can't comprehend how something simply withOUT reason would have even developed a rudimentary vision, just because something was out there to see, without something causing this to start to do this. I do not believe in blind luck. Just too much of it, as I've already expressed repeatedly in this and other threads. Something with a 'plan' did this somehow. That is the only thing that makes any sense.

Id' be even willing to believe aliens from somewhere all had a hand...a job in creating various components of things on our earth (as opposed to believing pure luck), like at their factory. You know...the grass factory, the bee factory, the cow factory, the orange tree factory, the roses factory, ..and they shipped it all here knowing we had a perfect oven to cook it all in. That sort of thing. These aliens could be 'angels', and God is the agregate force that allowed angels to be as factory workers, who assembled this whole thing here AND on other planets that seed the universe. Could all be a big game to see which place develops the best, the fastest, gets along with each other the best, etc. Do you know that there is actually a passage in the Bible where Jesus said he has another flock to tend to somewhere else? I've always been intrigued what he meant when he said that.

[JoeEllison]

:rolleyes:

[Kotatsu]

Because there was stuff to see, we were made to see. Because there was stuff to hear, we were made to hear. Because there was stuff, to feel, we were made to do so. Because there were things to smell, we were made to be able to. Because there was things to taste, we got that ability to.

And because there are echoes, we have organs for echolocation; the presence of nutrients dissolved in water have given us the ability to follow nutrient gradients to the source. And so on and so forth and suchlike.

But why are you turning your usual argument the wrong way around? Isn't it more in character to claim that because we have eyes, there are things to see, because we have ears, things have been made to make sounds, because we have the appropriate organs for feeling things, things were made to have different textures, because we have a sense of smell and taste, things were made to smell and taste, respectively?

What commanded these things to happen? PLEEEEAAASE don't tell me that say our taste buds occured because creatures that had them as opposed to creatures who did not have them, went on to survive better. Spare me that one.

Why is this so repulsive to you?

[Quinn]

Interesting thought, isn't this?

Not even slightly.

[Gate2501]

What commanded these things to happen? PLEEEEAAASE don't tell me that say our taste buds occured because creatures that had them as opposed to creatures who did not have them, went on to survive better. Spare me that one. Tell me how the taste bud started from nothing. Draw it out on paper for me.

You can't grasp how small random mutations over time, that allowed for the detection of *bad*(spoiled, rotten, poisonous) food would give a survival advantage?

[Safe-Keeper]

What commanded these things to happen? PLEEEEAAASE don't tell me that say our taste buds occured because creatures that had them as opposed to creatures who did not have them, went on to survive better. Spare me that one. Irreducible complexity must've been shot down at least 100 times on this forum alone. Why make a new thread about it?

[bruto]

Iamme, why is it so repugnant to you to believe that we are made to fit the world, rather than the world made to fit us?

You know, you could believe in a god, even in old Jehovah, whiskers, flowing robes and all, and still have the good sense, not to mention the humility and the biblical chops, to conclude that, evolution notwithstanding, the grass was already grass long before we got here. And while you might decide on your own to imagine that the design of the grass was in preparation for our eventual arrival, nothing in either science or Genesis tells us this. It is a gratuitous and ungrounded inference in both domains.

[ImaginalDisc]

A sloth is a creature that cannot run away; when climbs down to the forest floor to deficate(once a week or so), it is very vulnerable to predators.

Seems very unfair of an intelligent designer to make a sloth that way.

Why would a sloth need to descend from the trees to defecate?

[Nogbad]

Serves it right for being a sinner.

That was actually quite funny.

[Jimbo07]

A sloth is a creature that cannot run away; when climbs down to the forest floor to deficate(once a week or so), it is very vulnerable to predators.


That's why I'm into conservation and eat no more than one sloth a week...

(and magnets display this circular motion of eternalness, probably to be a testiment to the workings of God. Ever try to figure out which is the starting point in the magnet?)

The divergence of the magnetic field (specifically, B) = 0. Should you observe a magnetic monopole, let us know... you will become very rich. Haven't seen any proofs of God, however...

[this charming man]

That's why I'm into conservation and eat no more than one sloth a week...



I am glad to hear you are not a sloth glutton.

[MG1962]

Hey try being a female Koala - The male sits up in his tree and roars. If a female decides that's pretty cute she has to climb down to the ground and run the gauntlet of predators before getting to his tree to enjoy his company

[AnotherSillyAlias]

Hey try being a female Koala - The male sits up in his tree and roars. If a female decides that's pretty cute she has to climb down to the ground and run the gauntlet of predators before getting to his tree to enjoy his company


Sounds fair to me and I'm sure that, in some convoluted way, this is more proof of the existence of some god to Iamme.

[Silly Green Monkey]

What about the bush that responds to deer browsing by making a chemical the deer don't like, and releasing pheromones downwind that tell plants not yet touched that they need to prepare? Humans aren't even involved at all there!

[Elizabeth I]

So what else is new, eh? Actually this is rather interesting. Just like my other threads where I try to instill the belief that a higher power could very well be behind everything,... once again, the case may apply here.

Grass, trees...any organic life that is not classified as a 'creature', is basically stationary, rooted, and without the senses that creatures enjoy. Why is that? Why the split in evolution that causes such a dissimilarity. This is a MAJOR split.

Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?

Interesting thought, isn't this? One MORE thing that happens to be 'lucky' for us? Of all the things I have said about 'luck' in my one recent thread in Science, about the 6+ trillion cells in the human body, this then would be more 'luck', for us?

I can hear the argument now: 'What about cows, deer, etc. We eat THEM! THEY can run.' True. But don't some of you believe that, in the beginning, man was not designed to really eat meat? That we were designed to eat the things the earth provided as stationary?, such as fruits, berries, nuts, grains, etc.? But even so, let's say that we also WERE designed to eat creatures that could try to flee from their pursuer, perhaps this was 'allowed', at least later, based on the fact man was given a brain to be able to catch that which could escape us. But we were given those other things, those stationary things, to eat, that do not sense us, and therefore will not escape us, because this way there could almost certainly then be guaranteed a food source for God's highest creation, by method of farming... an ability to grow food individually, in gardens, as the intent in the Bible's 'Garden of Eden 'story'.

But this is not just a food issue. It is also a clothing issue, a housing issue, a ground cover issue (the lawnmower bit...could you imAGine if grass would see us coming?, and get up and run off the soil?). So, our Earth as we know it, and of which we so harmoniously fit in with, would not work right, if everything was created with senses! Luck, once again?, or design?

This is the kind of stuff I think about when I lay in bed and can't sleep right away.

Just a thought.

How about a large dose of Valium just before bedtime? You probably would drop right off to sleep and not have these troubling thoughts.

Oh, and how do barnacles, oysters, corals, sea anemones and other sessile animals fit into your silly scheme? They can't run away either.

If plants were designed for our use, why are so many of them poisonous?

God works in mysterious ways. :D

...and doesn't seem to like some people...

It is both our friend and fo.
Is that like "fee, fi, fo, fum"?

Hey try being a female Koala - The male sits up in his tree and roars. If a female decides that's pretty cute she has to climb down to the ground and run the gauntlet of predators before getting to his tree to enjoy his company

Koalas roar?

[AnotherSillyAlias]

Koalas roar?


More of a loud bellow.

http://www.planetozkids.com/oban/animals/facts-koala.htm

Apparently the condition of their teeth has some bearing on their sex life too.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s762023.htm

[Minarvia]

Why would a sloth need to descend from the trees to defecate?

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe it likes to dig a hole first? :confused:

[plumjam]

Why would a sloth need to descend from the trees to defecate?

I saw a documentary on the Discovery Channel that explained why.
It turns out that its toilet roll keeps blowing out of the tree.

[Sefarst]

Other famous Iamme observations and questions:

"Duuuuude, did you ever notice how Rhode Island is neither a road nor an island?!?!"

"Man, what kind of fruit do you think they put in Fruit Roll-Ups?"

"Why is it that if you blow in a dog's face he gets mad, but if you take him on a car ride he sticks his head out the window?"

[Kopji]

Could it be, that it was designed that way?, so that grass not only does not run away, but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it, or that say trees do not see we are 'after it', when we are trying to get wood for building our houses or for firewood?


The moon was placed up in the sky so we can't mistake it for being made of cheese.

Cows were created with internal stomachs so we could not drink their milk directly with a straw. And it's not chocolate milk, further proof of a God.

Most snakes taste like chicken, so we will eat chicken instead of poisonous snakes.

It's all so perfect! I'm convinced!

[Elizabeth I]

Iamme:

...how do barnacles, oysters, corals, sea anemones and other sessile animals fit into your silly scheme? They can't run away either.

[emphasis added]

[XBoxWarrior]

Other famous Iamme observations and questions:

"Duuuuude, did you ever notice how Rhode Island is neither a road nor an island?!?!"

"Man, what kind of fruit do you think they put in Fruit Roll-Ups?"

"Why is it that if you blow in a dog's face he gets mad, but if you take him on a car ride he sticks his head out the window?"

Links?

I need to read the dog thread.

X

[Kotatsu]

Iamme:
[emphasis added]

You will note that many of those are, in fact, eaten. If not by humans --- and the very idea of eating a sea anemone repulses me --- then at least by other animals with senses. QED.

[Elizabeth I]

You will note that many of those are, in fact, eaten. If not by humans --- and the very idea of eating a sea anemone repulses me --- then at least by other animals with senses. QED.

Yes, but Iamme's position seems to be that there is a designer because all this is just right for humans.

[Iamme]

If grass ran away Iamme could chase it about a bit every night before going to bed. Problem solved. :)

I read this the other day and did not respond. But I decided to because it is friendly, lighthearted, and made me laugh, even the second time I read it. :)

[Iamme]

Utter mindless rubbish.

In referal to me, of course, folks.

Well, since we must have genius amongst our midst, you tell me how it all happened. Start at the very beginning. I'll allow you to skip and get to the part where life was created from non-life, and then the cells started to develop the senses. If you can effectively do that, then you can write a book and help put all the churches out of business, I think.

[Iamme]

You can't grasp how small random mutations over time, that allowed for the detection of *bad*(spoiled, rotten, poisonous) food would give a survival advantage?

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!

And it is not as if one cell or two is involved., When you look at our entire body, the entire thing is like...blueprinted. Every part knows what an UNRELATED part is doing! Can YOU grasp that?!

[JoeEllison]

:rolleyes:

Iamme, your ignorance on the subject is obviously willful, and something you not only work hard at, but are apparently very proud of. That's your choice... but why do you also choose to start these threads, when you really show zero interest in actually dealing with what people tell you in any way at all?

[Hokulele]

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!

And it is not as if one cell or two is involved., When you look at our entire body, the entire thing is like...blueprinted. Every part knows what an UNRELATED part is doing! Can YOU grasp that?!


This is not true. If it were, autoimmune diseases would not exist.

http://www.4women.gov/FAQ/autoimmune.htm

[Safe-Keeper]

Iamme:

"These things are favorable, so we must be designed" is a non-sequitur. It's like the water in a hole saying that since it fits the hole in the ground, the hole in the ground must've been made for the water.

"You don't know how we got here" has nothing to do with anything. Modern-day people inserting a 'god of the gaps' to explain things we don't know are no better than ancients who explained away the flu as spirit influence (hence the name influenza).

And your statements of "look at how incredible the world is! It must've been created!" is not only an appeal to personal incredulity (akin to Napoleon turning down the idea of the steam engine because he thought it was a ludicrous idea), but it also begs the question: If the something incredible must've been designed, then who designed God? Who designed God's designer? Who created this designer's designer? And so on.

I'm sorry to say this, but these ideas are not new. As a matter of fact they're pretty old and worn-out arguments against ToE and abiogenesis.

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power.I don't know the details, but I suppose it does it the same way I do what I do without being instructed by a higher power.

[Gate2501]

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!

And it is not as if one cell or two is involved., When you look at our entire body, the entire thing is like...blueprinted. Every part knows what an UNRELATED part is doing! Can YOU grasp that?!


You know what...? You are beyond help. Everyone here constantly tells you *WHYYYYYYYY?!* these things happen.

WHYYYYYYYY?! don't you go read some biology textbooks, and actually come to an understanding of the topics you argue about.

You don't want to understand these things, because they do not jive with your magic sky fairy.

[bruto]

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!

And it is not as if one cell or two is involved., When you look at our entire body, the entire thing is like...blueprinted. Every part knows what an UNRELATED part is doing! Can YOU grasp that?!How do you explain harmful and fatal mutations? They happen too. Why should the rules be different for them?

[Kotatsu]

I guess not. Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!

That is just silly. The reason many mutations happen is because the mechanism for replicating DNA strands is imperfect. If it had been perfect, mutations would never occur (1), and evolution would not happen. Instead, life would cease to exist at the first natural catastrophe of sufficient size.

---
(1) At least not that kind of mutation, though I admit that I am not entirely sure how all kinds of mutations happen.

[fuelair]

What about the potatos (not to mention the potatoes). They have eyes. But no lawnmowers. Why is that. A really intelligent designer would have thought of that!!

[Kotatsu]

What about the potatos (not to mention the potatoes). They have eyes. But no lawnmowers. Why is that. A really intelligent designer would have thought of that!!

Well, he did create them to grow underneath the earth...

But what about birdeye maple?

[vidiviciveni]

Sorry Iamme, but not all plants just sit still and let themselves be eaten.

Read 'The Day of the Triffids', by Mr. J Wyndham about a terrible infestation of mobile killer plants we had in England over half a Century ago. Luckily we were saved by the bell.

[joobz]

In referal to me, of course, folks.

Well, since we must have genius amongst our midst, you tell me how it all happened. Start at the very beginning. I'll allow you to skip and get to the part where life was created from non-life, and then the cells started to develop the senses. If you can effectively do that, then you can write a book and help put all the churches out of business, I think.
You ask for exact and highly specific answers, which a detailed rational analysis of the world is apt to provide with time. In fact, much of the mechanisms in how life developed have been worked out and is available for your reading pleasure. And scienctists are continually asking the exact question you just did to help advance the knowledge we have. I applaud you for asking it.

However, you are providing and supporting "Isn't it neat that god did it!" as a counter claim to the highly detailed rational view which you demand of the biological sciences. It's as though you offer up your god as an excuse not to think and then claim that those who do wish to know the mechanisms of life's origin are merely blind to the "truth" you're privy to.

I hope you can understand that such a contradiction in argument is hypocritical and intellectually dishonest. Hold your hypothesis to the same standards you demand of science or don't be so arrogant to challenge science as wrong. You can't have it both ways.

[Beerina]

Grass, dandelions, etc. have evolved to grow much more quickly thanks to lawnmowers. The faster-growing ones that can reproduce before the next mow, did so, and passed on their faster-growing genes. Pretty soon even people who mowed weekly couldn't keep up with the dandelions.


Perhaps that is enough for you, Iamme?

[bokonon]

Clue me in on why a cell should mutate on it's own without being given permission to do so by a higher power. What is instructing the cell to mutate? WHY is it doing this? You people all gloss over such questions. You think stuff just does stuff. WHYYYYYYYY?!
Ionizing radiation may cause a cell to mutate. Chemical challenges from the environment may cause a cell to mutate. Foreign genetic material that gets into the cell may cause a cell to mutate. Simple transcription errors as the cell divides and duplicates its DNA may cause it to mutate.

All of these answers, and more, are available to you in any library you'd care to visit. You choose to ignore the answers there just as you choose to ignore them here, wrapping yourself in your security blanket of ignorance so you can continue to ask the same questions again as though such answers did not exist.

It is doing it because it has a purpose to improve it's situation. Purposes are put forth by things with brains!
Most mutations at this point in time, and especially with regard to higher organisms like mammals, do not improve the organism's situation. Many are neutral or harmful. Since human beings must survive for many years before they are capable of passing on their genes, the most harmful mutations never make it past the first generation. Not so long ago, most children with cystic fibrosis didn't live long enough to reach puberty; today, medical advances have extended their lives to 30 or 40 years. Next time you're waxing poetic about your perfect designer's perfect designs, maybe you could think about that one.

And it is not as if one cell or two is involved., When you look at our entire body, the entire thing is like...blueprinted. Every part knows what an UNRELATED part is doing! Can YOU grasp that?!
Yes, I can grasp it.

I can also grasp that a "perfect designer" would be capable of designing a better system than the one we find ourselves in. Can YOU grasp that?!

Seriously, why not just design clams so they couldn't make people who ate them sick? Today we know that too much pollution of the water in which the clams grow is the cause of the problem, so we can figure out for ourselves which clams are safe to eat and which are not. The bible solved the problem by just saying "Don't eat clams!"

For that matter, why design people who need to eat to live? Why not people who can survive on air and sunshine? Why is it that algae cells know how to do that photosynthesis trick, and my cells don't? Why do people make new people, and then the old people die? Wouldn't it make more sense to make a million perfect people who live forever, rather than all this churning?

If you need more sensible questions to occupy your mind as you're trying to lull yourself to sleep, just let me know. I have an ample supply.

[Undesired Walrus]

Since when did we get this impression that plants cannot move?

1: Put plant in dark.
2: Let a little bit of light in.
3: Come back two days later.
4: See results.

The problem with your logic on this Iamme, is that it is very poor logic. A true science takes in all available information it can find. And in this case, all the useless design. For example, the world's oceans are not 4 feet deep and thus designed for humans. Let's say about 3 feet deep for a dwarf or child to survive. Now if I were a caring designer, I'd make the Earth a bit bigger to fit all the water on it, and the oceans a lot more shallow. You have to ask yourself Iamme why any designer would make 2/3rds of the Earth a certain deathtrap for mankind.

I think you believe in evolution, so I'll ask the following question. We know how most things got to what they are now, how they developed, why the tides go in and out. You see how any grand designer is simply superfluous?

[Tormac]

I wonder if you could apply your notion of “harmonious fit” to raspberries Iamme.

On the one hand raspberries seem to be a gift from a divine creator; they taste yummy, make great preserves, are easy to carry and easy to pick, and are full of needed calories and vitamins. On the other hand they have all those pesky seeds that get stuck between my teeth when I eat them. I hate that. It is almost as if they were designed by a taunting trickster god, rather than the all powerful, all knowing, benevolent Christian god.

Do you think raspberries are evidence that the Native American trickster Raven god is the one true God, and that Christianity is a terrible lie? Or are raspberries evidence that the Christian God, while still omnipotent, is actually mean spirited and not benevolent, but the kind of God who would make things look really inviting, and yet taunt us with hidden suffering. This is the same kind of thinking (on the part of a creator) that leads to thorns on roses, and mean claws hidden in the paws of fuzzy playful kittens, or cocaine.

I talked to a coworker about this, and he says its evidence that Loki rules my destiny, and I’m doomed to be eaten by a fire giant, but he’s also weird, ever since he started this campaign in the office to replace Columbus Day with Leif Erickson Day instead.

A second co worker says that I’m thinking too much about useless things, and should stop trying to anthropomorphize an unfeeling, unaware universe, and get back to work.

Am I misapplying this notion of “harmonious fit” to Raspberries Iamme?

[Dorian Gray]

Dear Iamme:

In the book of Genesis, God loved Abel's animal offering, and disliked Cain's vegetarian offering. Thus, God intended for us to eat meat, and your whole 'eyeball' theory falls apart.

Thanks for playing,

Dorian Gray

P.S. I'm an atheist, but if you believe in God, chances are the Bible has some weight with you.

[plumjam]

I read this the other day and did not respond. But I decided to because it is friendly, lighthearted, and made me laugh, even the second time I read it. :)

Thanks Iamme. As you possibly already know you are my favourite forumite at JREF. You crack me up big time, and I agree with you on the whole 'life-can't-be just-time + luck' thing. :)

[plumjam]

I think you believe in evolution, so I'll ask the following question. We know how most things got to what they are now, how they developed, why the tides go in and out. You see how any grand designer is simply superfluous?

Hang on a second UW. Who is this 'we'? I wish I lived next door to one of them.
How did the Universe start, and why? How did the first life start? How and why is it that the Universe is so finely tuned that the probability against it being as it is and able to support life is 1 over 10 to the power...well, enough zeros to fill a library. What is consciousness? Why and how does it exist?
I could go on all night.
Where did you get this notion of us knowing how most things got to what they are now?
Is it just that you've heard other people say it so often that it's kind of an automatic response?

[joobz]

Hang on a second UW. Who is this 'we'? I wish I lived next door to one of them.
How did the Universe start, and why? How did the first life start? How and why is it that the Universe is so finely tuned that the probability against it being as it is and able to support life is 1 over 10 to the power...well, enough zeros to fill a library. What is consciousness? Why and how does it exist?
I could go on all night.
Where did you get this notion of us knowing how most things got to what they are now?
Is it just that you've heard other people say it so often that it's kind of an automatic response?
*clears throat*
You ask for exact and highly specific answers, which a detailed rational analysis of the world is apt to provide with time. In fact, much of the mechanisms in how life developed have been worked out and is available for your reading pleasure. And scienctists are continually asking the exact question you just did to help advance the knowledge we have. I applaud you for asking it.

However, you are providing and supporting "Isn't it neat that god did it!" as a counter claim to the highly detailed rational view which you demand of the biological sciences. It's as though you offer up your god as an excuse not to think and then claim that those who do wish to know the mechanisms of life's origin are merely blind to the "truth" you're privy to.

I hope you can understand that such a contradiction in argument is hypocritical and intellectually dishonest. Hold your hypothesis to the same standards you demand of science or don't be so arrogant to challenge science as wrong. You can't have it both ways.

[Tubbythin]

Or see news from around the world. Or fly there. Or fly into outer space so we can look back on the place we are from.
Yeah. Science is great. It gave us telecommunications and airplanes and... the theory of evolution.


But when you consider that not only are there things such as oranges with sections made for bite-sized non-messy eating,
And harmless looking mushrooms that'll kill you.


and totally non-biological things that asssist us in spectacular ways (take the principles of leverage), photography, the radio and light wave spectrum of radio, tv, x-rays, microwaves,...all kinds of stuff that are of imMENSE value to us, ...this all makes it appear that there must have been some plan art work from the very beginning.
You do realise radio waves, microwaves, light waves and x-rays are all essentially the same thing?
How come if they're so useful we weren't designed to see in x-ray or i.r. then?


PLEEEEAAASE don't tell me that say our taste buds occured because creatures that had them as opposed to creatures who did not have them, went on to survive better.
You don't think being able to taste the difference between clean water and contaminated water would give you a survival advantage?
Draw it out on paper for me.
No. I wasn't designed to be an artist.

Tell me how our hearing started and how all the parts started evolving into the complexity it did.
You expect me to teach you a course in biology for nowt?


Now, one could argue that even a God did it SOMEhow. So that unless God all poofed it here, so we'd all have eyes, hearing, taste, smell, feel...then how did GOD do it? Good question, I just asked myself in advance, eh? (I have to think defensively you know). Well, I'm not big on believing in the poof theory either. Somehow it happened, but with reason. I can't comprehend how something simply withOUT reason would have even developed a rudimentary vision, just because something was out there to see, without something causing this to start to do this. I do not believe in blind luck. Just too much of it, as I've already expressed repeatedly in this and other threads. Something with a 'plan' did this somehow. That is the only thing that makes any sense.

So what is this plan then?


Id' be even willing to believe aliens from somewhere all had a hand...a job in creating various components of things on our earth (as opposed to believing pure luck), like at their factory. You know...the grass factory, the bee factory, the cow factory, the orange tree factory, the roses factory, ..and they shipped it all here knowing we had a perfect oven to cook it all in. That sort of thing. These aliens could be 'angels', and God is the agregate force that allowed angels to be as factory workers, who assembled this whole thing here AND on other planets that seed the universe. Could all be a big game to see which place develops the best, the fastest, gets along with each other the best, etc. Do you know that there is actually a passage in the Bible where Jesus said he has another flock to tend to somewhere else? I've always been intrigued what he meant when he said that.
So a designer created a race of intelligent designers to create an Earth in which 4 billion years later intelligent humans would emerge. You think this is a possibility and yet struggle to see how animals that could hear their predators coming might survive better than those that can't?

[Silentknight]

Iamme, since you're fond of science experiments you can try at home, I've got one for you. Go out in your yard and eat the first mushrooms you come across. Yes, those large softball-sized things that spew out black dust count as mushrooms too. Then marvel at just how well God designed those mushrooms to be eaten by humans. After all, they don't run away, they just kind of sit there and let you pluck them out and stuff them in your mouth.

(Don't really do this. I was just kidding. Most species of mushrooms are highly toxic, and you should never touch them unless you have an expert who can identify them for you. But hopefully you get my point.)

[Elizabeth I]

What about the potatos (not to mention the potatoes). They have eyes. But no lawnmowers. Why is that. A really intelligent designer would have thought of that!!

And heads! Lettuce and cabbages have heads! But then...does that mean...

EWWWWWW!!!!!

[Hokulele]

And heads! Lettuce and cabbages have heads! But then...does that mean...

EWWWWWW!!!!!



Braaaiiiiiinslaw.

[RandFan]

Interesting thought, isn't this? In all honesty, no. I find it silly and ignorant of basic biological evolution. I have to admit that there was a time that I did in fact find importance in similar ideas. Then I learned about evolution and there was no need.

Humans are pattern and meaning seeking individuals. You are trying to find meaning where there is no meaning. There are plants that are capable of locomotion and animals that are not. There are some organisms that we aren't sure whether they are more animal like or more plant like. You've drawn a clear distinction between things that don't really have such a clear distinction. Only a gradient between extremes and you are simply choosing to compare extremes and are doing so arbitrarily.

[RandFan]

In referal to me, of course, folks.

Well, since we must have genius amongst our midst, you tell me how it all happened. Start at the very beginning. I'll allow you to skip and get to the part where life was created from non-life, and then the cells started to develop the senses. If you can effectively do that, then you can write a book and help put all the churches out of business, I think. God of the gaps. Argument from ignorance.

In any event, we know quite a bit. I think most people would be surprised by just how much we know. I know I am blown away by how much I've learned and I've barely scratched the surface.

We don't know everything. That we don't have all the answers is no reason to insert god into the equation.

There was a time we didn't know how to synthesize carbon.
There was a time we didn't understand the motion of the planets.
There was a time when we didn't understand the basic structure of matter.
There was a time when we didn't know all of the wonderful bits of knowledge that we know now.Back then some people simply said "god did it". Science on the other hand set about looking for answers and the gaps in our knowledge where god hid started to shrink. They shrink every day for those who are willing to find the truth. If you want to protect your favorite hiding place for god then please don't spend the time to learn science, particularly evolutionary biology.

[Foster Zygote]

God of the gaps. Argument from ignorance.

In any event, we know quite a bit. I think most people would be surprised by just how much we know. I know I am blown away by how much I've learned and I've barely scratched the surface.

We don't know everything. That we don't have all the answers is no reason to insert god into the equation.

There was a time we didn't know how to synthesize carbon.
There was a time we didn't understand the motion of the planets.
There was a time when we didn't understand the basic structure of matter.
There was a time when we didn't know all of the wonderful bits of knowledge that we know now.Back then some people simply said "god did it". Science on the other hand set about looking for answers and the gaps in our knowledge where god hid started to shrink. They shrink every day for those who are willing to find the truth. If you want to protect your favorite hiding place for god then please don't spend the time to learn science, particularly evolutionary biology.

RandFan is back!!! Yea! Good to see your words again mate!

[JAStewart]

but so our food does not see that we are 'after' it

I don't know if you've ever been hunting, or watched animals hunting. When they see predators they tend to scram.

[jimmygun]

I am glad to hear you are not a sloth glutton.

You can only eat one sloth a week because you have to prepare them in a very very very slow cooker. Duh!

And another thing, if grass ran away, lawn mowers would move that much more faster. Duh!

[Elizabeth I]

In all honesty, no. I find it silly and ignorant of basic biological evolution. I have to admit that there was a time that I did in fact find importance in similar ideas. Then I learned about evolution and there was no need.

Humans are pattern and meaning seeking individuals. You are trying to find meaning where there is no meaning. There are plants that are capable of locomotion and animals that are not. There are some organisms that we aren't sure whether they are more animal like or more plant like. You've drawn a clear distinction between things that don't really have such a clear distinction. Only a gradient between extremes and you are simply choosing to compare extremes and are doing so arbitrarily.

Yay! It's RandFan! Where have you been? The forum has missed you!

[bruto]

You can only eat one sloth a week because you have to prepare them in a very very very slow cooker. Duh!

And another thing, if grass ran away, lawn mowers would move that much more faster. Duh!But wouldn't that be great? We could just get out the lawnmower and rev it up, and threaten the lawn into submission!

[Wowbagger]

In similar vein as the thread's title:

I often wondered: Why is it socially acceptable to rip carrots from the ground, but not acceptable to rip the hair out of a girl you like?


(Note to any co-workers who might happen upon this post: I was kidding!!)

[The Grave]

Isn't it 'lucky' that carbon is carbon and not plutonium (eek!), otherwise we'd all be dead.

Sorry. We are all dead.

[Kotatsu]

I often wondered: Why is it socially acceptable to rip carrots from the ground, but not acceptable to rip the hair out of a girl you like?

Because they are not of the same size. Some societies do allow it if you just rip out a piece of her head as well. As long as the amount of ripped-out material weighs about as much as an average carrot, you should be ok. Mind you, these societies will frown upon you if you rip out a too large carrot from the ground, though. And don't even think about turnips!

[bruto]

In similar vein as the thread's title:

I often wondered: Why is it socially acceptable to rip carrots from the ground, but not acceptable to rip the hair out of a girl you like?


(Note to any co-workers who might happen upon this post: I was kidding!!)Ah, but is it acceptable simply to rip a carrot from the ground? I once knew a group of biodynamic gardening Anthroposophists who would have argued that point. They felt that it was in fact an insult to the carrots to do so, and that as a gesture of appeasement or respect, one should always cut the top off a root veggie and lay it back down on the ground.

[Wowbagger]

Relevant to the OP, though since I did not read the whole thread, don't know if this was brought up, yet, but:

I suspect chloroplasts have a lot to do with it. Plants formed a symbiotic relationship with primitive chloroplast-like bacteria, and thus could absorb light for food and energy. And, thus, there was no selection pressure to move around.

The early animals cells never formed the symbiotic relationship, so from that point forward, they were destined to evolve sensory organs and transportation systems, for the sake of finding and obtaining food.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I just came back from Carrotland. Apparently, in their own country, they sometimes ask a different question: "Why is it socially acceptable to rip hair out of humans, but not to rip girl carrots you like from the ground?"

What an oddball society!

[RandFan]

Yay! It's RandFan! Where have you been? The forum has missed you!Thanks Elizabeth.

I detailed my absence here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=109168).

[RandFan]

I suspect chloroplasts have a lot to do with it. Plants formed a symbiotic relationship with primitive chloroplast-like bacteria, and thus could absorb light for food and energy. And, thus, there was no selection pressure to move around. Some people see the natural world and find any meaning they want including proof of god. Scientists and critical thinkers set aside preconceptions and seek answers. It doesn't look as if the god of the gaps answer is going away anytime soon.