Alberto G. Corona Wrote:

> There are greath differences between evolutionary designs and rational design.

Yes there are big differences, rational designs are, well, rational, but
evolutionary designs are idiotic. Mother Nature (Evolution) is a slow
and stupid
tinkerer, it had over 3 billion years to work on the problem but it
couldn't even
come up with a macroscopic part that could rotate in 360 degrees!
Rational designers had less difficulty coming up with the wheel. The
only advantage
Evolution had is that until it managed to invent brains it was the
only way complex
objects could get built.

 I can think of a few reasons for natures poor design:

1) Time Lags: Evolution is so slow the animal is adapted to conditions that may
   no longer exist, that's why moths have an instinct to fly into candle
   flames. I have no doubt that if you just give them a million years or so,
   evolution will give hedgehogs a better defense than rolling up into a
   ball when confronted by their major predator, the automobile. The only
   problem is that by then there won't be any automobiles.

2) Historical Constraints: The eye of all vertebrate animals is backwards,
   the connective tissue of the retina is on the wrong side so light must
   pass through it before it hits the light sensitive cells. There's no doubt
   this degrades vision and we would be better off if the retina was
reversed as
   it is in squids whose eye evolved independently, however It's too late for
   that to happen now because all the intermediate forms would not be viable.

   Once a standard is set, with all its interlocking mechanisms it's very
   difficult to abandon it completely, even when much better methods are
   found. That's why we still have inches and yards even though the metric
   system is clearly superior. That's why we still have Windows. Nature is
   enormously conservative, it may add new things but it doesn't abandon the
   old because the intermediate stages must also work. That's also why humans
   have all the old brain structures that lizards have as well as new ones.

3) Lack of Genetic Variation: Mutations are random and you might not get the
   mutation you need when you need it. Feathers work better for flight than
   the skin flaps bats use, but bats never produced the right mutations for
   feathers and skin flaps are good enough.

4) Constraints of Costs and Materials: Life is a tangle of trade offs and

5) An Advantage on one Level is a Disadvantage on Another: One gene can give
   you resistance to malaria, a second identical gene will give you sickle
   cell anemia.

6) Evolution has no foresight: This is the most important reason of all.
   A jet engine works better than a prop engine in an airplane. I give you a
   prop engine and tell you to turn it into a jet, but you must do it while
   the engine is running, you must do it in one million small steps, and you
   must do it so every one of those small steps immediately improves
the operation
   of the engine. Eventually you would get an improved engine of some
sort, but it
   wouldn't look anything like a jet.

   If the tire on your car is getting worn you can take it off and put a
   new one on, but evolution could never do something like that, because when
   you take the old tire off you have temporally made things worse, now you
   have no tire at all. With evolution EVERY step (generation), no matter
   how many, MUST be an immediate improvement over the previous one. it
   can't think more than one step ahead, it doesn't understand one step
   backward two steps forward.

And that's why there are no 100 ton supersonic birds. Yes I know, such a
creature would use a lot of energy, but if we can afford to do so why
can't nature?
Being slow, weak, and cheap is not my idea a an inspired design.

 John K Clark

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to