Alberto G. Corona <agocor...@gmail.com> Wrote:
>> 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!
> > First of all, 360 degrees rotation is present in the flagela of the
> bacteria, invented about 3800 million years ago
I know, that's why I said "macroscopic". It's easy to make if the wheel is
microscopic because nutriments can just diffuse in and waste products
diffuse out; but as parts get bigger the volume increases by the cube of
the radius but the surface area only increases by the square, so when
things get big diffusion just isn't good enough. Evolution never figured
out how to do better and make a wheel large enough to see, but people did.
> under intense comet bombardement. try to do it yourself in the same
Oh I think if I tried real hard I could figure out how to make a wheel that
you didn't need a electron microscope to see, particularly if you gave me
3.8 billion years to work on the problem. But the task stumped Evolution.
> If there is no weel in natural evolution is because legs are far superior.
Claiming that nature could find no use for a macroscopic part that could
move in 360 degrees, a part like a neck or a shoulder or a wrist or a ball
bearing, is simply not credible. And I have no doubt that a supersonic bird
or a propeller driven whale or a fire breathing lizard or a nuclear powered
cow could successfully fill environmental niches, but making such a thing
was just too hard for random mutation and natural selection to do.
> The claim of superiority of reason over nature is the last vestige of
> unjustified antropocentrism
Anthropomorphism is a very useful tool but like any tool it can be misused;
not all anthropomorphisms are unjustified.
> in its most dangerous form: Pride and self worship.
Guilty as charged, I'm a big fan of pride and self worship, it may be a bit
dangerous but is sure beats the hell out of worshiping God.
> evolution works simultaneously with infinite variables
Evolution does not work in the rarefied realm of pure mathematics it works
in the physical world, and as near as we can tell in physics there is not a
infinite number of anything.
> we NEVER are sure of knowing in FULL the reasons behind an evolutionary
True, but we don't need to know all the reasons to make something better;
we don't know all the factors than caused bone to have the exact
composition that it does, but a human made titanium girder is a hell of a
lot stronger than any bone.
> That gives evolutionary design an appearance of mess poor design
It certainly does!
> This is NOT the case.
Baloney. Evolution has no need to be perfect because an organism need not
be perfect, it just needs to be a little better than the competition. Just
look at the cells of the retina of the eye of any vertebrate animal, the
blood vessels that feed those cells and the nerves that communicate with
them aren’t in the back of the eye as would be logical but at the front, so
light must pass through them before the light hits the light sensitive
cells, this makes vision less sharp than it would otherwise be and creates
a blind spot right in the middle of the visual field. No amount of spin can
turn this dopey mess into a good design, a human engineer would have to be
drunk to come up with a hodgepodge like that.
> If evolution and reason collide, the prudent is to consider that the
> reason don´t know enough.
That's not being prudent that's just making lame excuses for Evolution. In
the case of invertebrates nature got it right and so in the eye of a squid
it put the blood vessels and nerves in the back of the eye as any idiot can
see where they belong, but it's far too late for Evolution to give that
improvement to vertebrates because it would have to go backwards and start
over, and with Evolution every change must confer a immediate advantage;
Evolution can never admit that it made a mistake in the past but must
always blindly march forward, a human designer can swallow his pride junk
his old design an create a new and better standard.
> natural evolution does not start from scratch it has to modify previous
Exactly, and that is a huge disadvantage, Evolution can't erase anything it
can only add new crap on top of the old crap because every change must
confer a immediate advantage. Consider the task of changing the tire on a
car and imagine if every single part of the task no matter how small, every
movement of a bolt every adjustment of both the flat and the good tire,
must confer a IMMEDIATE advantage to the operation of the car. You'd never
get the tire changed!
> while reason without the help of tradiction, operates from scratch.
Yes, so a human can jump directly from the tangled mess of DOS to a clean
streamlined operating system like LINUX, but Evolution can only add even
more tangled bells and whistles to DOS.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at