Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,213 Year: 5,470/9,624 Month: 495/323 Week: 135/204 Day: 5/4 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discussion on Creation article...
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 10 of 95 (322436)
06-16-2006 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by RAZD
06-12-2006 7:32 PM


I'm surprised he didn't mention the one thing that is, as far as I know (and according to Trivial Pursuit ), unique to the humming birds - the ability to fly backwards.

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 06-12-2006 7:32 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by kuresu, posted 06-16-2006 11:24 PM MangyTiger has not replied
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 06-18-2006 8:45 AM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 14 of 95 (322886)
06-18-2006 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by RAZD
06-18-2006 8:45 AM


Note to self - be more precise!
Several insects, most notably the dragonfly that has been around since ? the creataceous ? can fly backwards.
Sorry about that - I should have specified "unique amongst birds".
Since the original hummingbird part of the discussion was comparing and contrasting hummingbirds to other birds I took the 'bird context' as a given - but as the thread progresses that nuance gets lost in the overall discussion so it was a mistake on my part to omit it.

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 06-18-2006 8:45 AM RAZD has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 23 of 95 (329169)
07-06-2006 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by RAZD
07-05-2006 11:52 PM


Re: More Fantasies by Mr Matrix
What is unique about hummingbird flight?
As I said in Message 10 (and clarified in Message 14 ) hummingbirds are the only birds that can fly backwards.

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by RAZD, posted 07-05-2006 11:52 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by RAZD, posted 07-06-2006 7:48 AM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 29 of 95 (329703)
07-07-2006 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by RAZD
07-06-2006 7:48 AM


Re: More Fantasies by Mr Matrix
Hi RAZD. Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was serving my first suspension (yea! I've arrived at EvC )
I have also watched birds of prey hover over potential prey move backwards.
Maybe it's different in the US but every bird of prey I've watched over here (and thinking about it on every nature documentary I've ever watched) hovers by riding a thermal, and any backwards movement is just adjusting position within the thermal.
To compare this to the powered hovering and backward movement of a hummingbird seems kind of risible to me.
Wait a minute - let's look at the sentence which follows:
I wouldn't call it "flying backwards"...
Ok so given the topic is flying backwards you pretty much state yourself it's irrelevant to the discussion so we can just forget you brought it up.
I don't know enought about the honeycreepers in Hawaii (especially the extinct ones) to know what their abilities were (using a similar food source) or enough about tropical birds to say that none others have the ability to back up.
Neither do I. I was merely repeating what is frequently stated on nature and science programs (and quiz shows and Trivial Pursuit cards etc.). Maybe it is just an urban myth - but I can find nothing on the web that says so.
Choosing a species that is "best" at some ability or other, and then claiming that "wow, it's better than all the others, so it must not be evolution" is post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy coupled with the argument from incredulity and ignorance and then leaping to a conclusion not supported by evidence.
And you're addressing this paragraph to me why exactly? You asked 'what was unique about hummigbird flight?' and I replied 'they are unique amonst birds in their ability to fly backwards'. In what way does my observation that to the best of my knowledge hummingbirds are the only birds that can fly backwards have any connection with the paragraph above? Keep your condescending irrelevancies to yourself in future please.
Again, what is so unique about hummingbird flight? What is\are the feature(s) that would show up in fossils?
Well according to the Smithsonian Institute it's the elbow and wrist bones:
Unlike those of other birds, hummingbirds' elbows and wrist bones are fused and virtually immobile.
The article also contains some a mention of the difference between the hummingbird wing motion and that of other birds (and helicopters!):
The pattern of the wing-beat is more of a figure-eight than a circle like a helicopter or an up and down motion like other birds. With this motion, hummingbirds can use their unusual wings to hover, fly forward, fly backwards, and even fly upside down.
Go on, admit it - they're unique - Trivial Pursuit is never wrong

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by RAZD, posted 07-06-2006 7:48 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 07-08-2006 10:02 AM MangyTiger has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 54 of 95 (335429)
07-26-2006 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by BobAliceEve
07-26-2006 6:11 AM


B&C&T&E is off-topic (but you're wrong )
If I make a comment about Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice I think we'll end up with a moderator telling us it's off topic so I have created a Coffee House Thread where I have challenged your description of it as a porn movie.
I hope you'll respond over there.

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by BobAliceEve, posted 07-26-2006 6:11 AM BobAliceEve has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 70 of 95 (340402)
08-15-2006 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by ringo
08-15-2006 2:48 PM


Re: Bad design is a myth
What if he deliberately designed the paint to flake off? Or the windshield to cloud over as time passed?
We used to call that "Built-in obsolescence" (whatever happened to that phrase? you never hear it any more[1]) - so his boss in Detroit might well regard him as a good designer
On a serious note, I have said on numerous times that we cannot say whether a design is good or bad or not without knowing the requirements it is trying to satisfy.
[1]The answer of course is that goods and credit are so cheap now we just buy a new one - without the pain level we used to have...

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ringo, posted 08-15-2006 2:48 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by ringo, posted 08-15-2006 11:29 PM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 78 of 95 (340548)
08-16-2006 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by ringo
08-15-2006 11:29 PM


Re: Bad design is a myth
I know that Ford, Chysler, et al. are trying to screw us out of every cent they can, but how can you apply that to "The Designer"? I mean, what would he/she/it have to gain by us wearing out "prematurely"?
Maybe we (or the Earth generally) is an experiment to see how long it takes to evolve a species that can fix the design flaws, or what novel methods we come up with (surgery, drugs, genetic engineering, who know what else). Or maybe he/she/it is just a major league sadist who is enjoying watching life on earth suffer.
My other excuse for taking the customer's viewpoint is that it's the only viewpoint we have. If we don't know the designer's intentions, we have only our own expectations to go by.
I kind of agree but it does mean - to me at least - that all our discussions about good vs. bad design are reduced to nothing more than speculations. Mind you, were they ever anything more than that anyway?
(By the way, wouldn't mange be an example of bad design?)
Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps Earth is a biological warfare experiment by an alien race who are attempting to produce a weapon against their intergalactic enemy - a species with luxuriant fur resembling dog hair. In this case the mites responsible for mange would be an example of good design
Like I say, without knowing the desired outcome we have no valid criteria for judging whether a design is good or bad.

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by ringo, posted 08-15-2006 11:29 PM ringo has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6467 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 81 of 95 (340647)
08-16-2006 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by nator
08-16-2006 7:01 PM


Re: what evidence for design
quote:
And, a funny porn movie is still a porn movie and your statement that "actually it is a comedy" is proof that you were demeaning.
I didn't know that Alan Alda did porn.
I actually started a thread where BobAliceEve could argue this point but they never showed up (personally I think the four Oscar nominations scared them off ).
By the way - Alan Alda isn't in it according to IMDB

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by nator, posted 08-16-2006 7:01 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by BobAliceEve, posted 08-17-2006 5:32 AM MangyTiger has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024