Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 1/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Side Orders ⇒ Coffee House ⇒

Symphony by accident

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Symphony by accident
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 9 of 23 (605678)
02-21-2011 3:09 PM 		Reply to: Message 5 by slevesque
02-21-2011 2:44 PM

But then, isn't the majority of mutations fixed through genetic drift ? (ie randomly)
​
If I'm not mistaken the number of mutations fixed by selection is quite small compared to genetic drift.
​
Sure, but Bolder-dash was talking about the structure of the eye, which is not a product of genetic drift.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by slevesque, posted 02-21-2011 2:44 PM slevesque has not replied
  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006

Normal Thread Display

(1)
Message 11 of 23 (605681)
02-21-2011 3:17 PM 		Reply to: Message 1 by nwr
02-21-2011 11:13 AM

I had an isolated system and quite by accident it entered a state of higher entropy.
​
After that, by a complete accident, the random motion of air molecules did not cause my lungs to explode.
​
Later that same day, I accidentally didn't quantum tunnel to the Moon.
​
All sorts of bizarre accidents like that have been happening to me lately.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nwr, posted 02-21-2011 11:13 AM nwr has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by nwr, posted 02-21-2011 4:11 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 13 of 23 (605687)
02-21-2011 3:28 PM 		Reply to: Message 10 by slevesque
02-21-2011 3:14 PM

Yes, but the force of the filter must be proportionally as strong as the quantity of randomness flooding in.
​
Someone would still be justified to call it accidental if the filter only gives it a weak direction.
​
Well, again, the topic was the eye, and whether Richard Dawkins thinks it happened "by accident". Clearly he thinks that the filter of selection is strong enough to produce the eye; consequently, he does not think that the eye is accidental.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by slevesque, posted 02-21-2011 3:14 PM slevesque has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by slevesque, posted 02-21-2011 3:47 PM Dr Adequate has replied
  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 21 of 23 (605741)
02-21-2011 9:44 PM 		Reply to: Message 14 by slevesque
02-21-2011 3:47 PM

I hear you, but your changing the goalpost. My remark was concerning Nwr's OP, which in turn was in reply to Bolder-dash's statement that evolution as a whole is a random process.
​
And specifically the eye. If he'd confined himself to saying that quantitatively with respect to DNA the majority of evolution was random he'd have been telling the truth and so doing nothing to further God's Glorious Cause Of Creationism.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by slevesque, posted 02-21-2011 3:47 PM slevesque has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024