Sat May 07, 2011 4:31 pm
New species created in lab. May 3 issue Proceedings of National Acadamy of Sciences.
If it comes out of someones mouth it's biased BS until the scientific process has been applied.
This is the strongest, most insideous bias there is. Being emotionally invested in your theory.
To test for this bias, simply immagine how you would feel if someone were to prove to you that your beliefs are wrong.
Sun May 08, 2011 3:36 pm
Sorry for the delay. I have been away for a few days.
I think you have misunderstood me.
It’s not me that is suggesting bad design is evidence of randomness.
This idea has been put out by canalon and you appear to agree with him.
I was merely responding to his assertion. He appears not to answer any questions his assertions raise. So they are coming over as statements of doctrine, and I get very suspicious of doctrinaire pronouncements, because they invariably lack evidence or logic.
Sun May 08, 2011 10:54 pm
Mon May 09, 2011 5:46 pm
Mon May 09, 2011 7:03 pm
Mon May 09, 2011 9:44 pm
The whole point of the bad design argument is not that bad design is evidence of randomness but that it is evidence of a complete lack of planning, foresight and generally what we call design in nature.
(my emphasis)”This is how the abstract reads
“The way in which the giant panda, Ailuropoda melanoleuca, uses the radial sesamoid bone — its 'pseudo-thumb' — for grasping makes it one of the most extraordinary manipulation systems in mammalian evolution1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The bone has been reported to function as an active manipulator, enabling the panda to grasp bamboo stems between the bone and the opposing palm2,6, 7, 8. We have used computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and related techniques to analyse a panda hand. The three-dimensional images we obtained indicate that the radial sesamoid bone cannot move independently of its articulated bones, as has been suggested1, 2, 3, but rather acts as part of a functional unit of manipulation. The radial sesamoid bone and the accessory carpal bone form a double pincer-like apparatus in the medial and lateral sides of the hand, respectively, enabling the panda to manipulate objects with great dexterity.
The panda oddly enough is a carnivore not an herbivore: its stomach and intestines are adapted for meat and its teeth are so strong they can chew through metal. The panda esophagus has a tough, horny lining to protect it from sharp, bamboo splinters. The stomach is thick and muscular and gizardlike. The rest of the digestive system is similar or that of other carnivores but because it doesn’t eat meat is lightly used.
Pandas don’t have a specialized gut like cows and deer for breaking down fibrous material. To get enough nourishment from the relatively nutrient-free bamboo, the panda has a stomach like a conveyor belt. Food is barely chewed, only 17 percent of it is digested, compared to 80 percent for most herbivores, and it passes through the body in as little as five hours. After a panda has sat in one place for a while it is not uncommon for it leave behind seven to nine kilograms of woody, spindle-shaped droppings. On average a panda produces 13 kilograms of droppings a day.
Japanese researchers have found a bacteria in panda dung that has shown to be more effective in breaking down organic garbage than almost any other known substance. In one experiment the bacteria broke down 100 kilograms of waste into three kilograms after 17 weeks, producing only water and carbon dioxide as by products. The researchers discovered the bacteria and found 270 other kinds of microbes in panda dung they received from a zoo.
See the ancester of bears had a thumb, but they lost it.
And I see that you are using the old Occam's razor saw a bit down thread. You know the "a designer is a simpler explanation that random accumulation of unlikely event yada yada yada..." kind of argument. Would you care to tell us where the designer comes from? because if there is one, it must come from somewhere, no? And we now have a very interesting recursive loop in the making, that does not appear to be any more probable than random accumulation of rare events followed by selection.
let us make a dealyada yada yada
Mon May 09, 2011 10:18 pm
Tue May 10, 2011 1:18 am
Thu May 12, 2011 12:13 am
As for the laws of physics, nobody designed them. They are the consequence of the interaction whatever constituted the primordial soup of the Big Bang.
Thu May 12, 2011 1:32 am
Sat May 14, 2011 3:17 pm
Sat May 14, 2011 4:30 pm