Posted: Apr 16, 2012 1:40 pm
Oh, well, here we go again it’s petunias time for me.
I came across this character on another forum ages ago and now they are spouting the same old tripe again over on the "Evolution & Natural Selection" sub forum here on rationalskepticism.org.
I thought that I should introduce you all to asyncritus and put the tripe where it belongs before it pollutes the thread that it was raised in.
Fasten your seatbelts we're in for a bumpy ride here.
Why is there no other way for this to happen?
Why can birds not have gradually evolved over time from reptilian ancestors via theropod dinosaurs?
Why can feathers not have gradually evolved in this lineage which provided utility in ways other than flight – insulation or display for example?
Why can an organisms’ metabolism not change from providing little excess body heat to providing more and more body heat over time?
Why can lungs not be modified by random mutation and natural selection from a simple air sac to one with flow through functionality?
Just what do you think actually prevents these things from happening.
And, remember, personal incredulity is not a valid argument.
No one, except creationist straw man arguments, propose that an organism suddenly appeared with brand new novel adaptions like a full set of flight apparatus within a single generation.
Over to you.
But nice to see you here and it’s nice to have a new chew toy.
I came across this character on another forum ages ago and now they are spouting the same old tripe again over on the "Evolution & Natural Selection" sub forum here on rationalskepticism.org.
I thought that I should introduce you all to asyncritus and put the tripe where it belongs before it pollutes the thread that it was raised in.
Fasten your seatbelts we're in for a bumpy ride here.
Well, feathers are just modified scales, so no problem there, as they could have had uses other than flight to start with.asyncritus wrote:
Hi Hallucination
'Tis me again!
Still peddling the old tripe, I see!
The old old question I asked you a while ago still stands unanswered.
Let me grant you that mutations + natural selection produced a bird's wings (for instance) from a reptile's forelimbs. Wildly improbable, of course, but let's suppose. And feathers from scales
Theropod dinosaurs could have been endothermic before they evolved flight so, no problem there either.asyncritus wrote:, and endothermic metabolism from ectothermic metabolism.
again, something that could have evolved in theropod dinosaurs prior to wings and flight, so, again there is no problem there either.asyncritus wrote:Not to mention the entirely new lung structure, in which air enters the lung on exhalation rather than on inhalation.
No magic required, all of the examples that you have provided so far could have evolved prior to the evolution of wings and flight. If that is what you are getting at.asyncritus wrote:All that by the magic of waving the old Random Mutation Selection wand. (Has common sense completely deserted your halls???)
Why?asyncritus wrote:
Now the questions:
Bird hatches out from reptile's egg, as Goldschmidt suggested, because he knew that there's no other way for this to happen!
Why is there no other way for this to happen?
Why can birds not have gradually evolved over time from reptilian ancestors via theropod dinosaurs?
Why can feathers not have gradually evolved in this lineage which provided utility in ways other than flight – insulation or display for example?
Why can an organisms’ metabolism not change from providing little excess body heat to providing more and more body heat over time?
Why can lungs not be modified by random mutation and natural selection from a simple air sac to one with flow through functionality?
Just what do you think actually prevents these things from happening.
And, remember, personal incredulity is not a valid argument.
Do we really have to go there again? You sound like you have been to the Stevebee School of argumentation.asyncritus wrote:1 What could the new bird do with the brand new flight apparatus? After all, he's still a reptile in his head. Can you see it? 'Duhhhh! What the hell do I do with these things'? Jumps off cliff. THUDDD! End of bird evolution.
No one, except creationist straw man arguments, propose that an organism suddenly appeared with brand new novel adaptions like a full set of flight apparatus within a single generation.
Not all flight ability is instinctual, have you never seen young birds on nature documentaries stretching their wings and learning how to fly. Again, no one except creationists’ straw man arguments propose that an organism suddenly appeared with brand new novel adaptions like a full set of flight instincts within a single generation.asyncritus wrote:
It requires empowering flight instincts - or it couldn't get off the ground, no matter how good the wings etc may be. Think of a fighter plane with an untrained administrative clerk at the controls. Disaster on the way? You bet.
They evolved in tandem with the flight apparatus, slowly, over time.
How do any behaviours originate and evolve, there’s nothing magical that has to “enter” the genome, behaviours and the ability to learn do have a genetic component which can be modified and change over time just like any other trait under genetic control.asyncritus wrote:3 And how did they enter the genome?
Yes and no one, except creationists’ straw man arguments propose that any Lamarckian process is required for instincts to arise and evolve.asyncritus wrote:Remember, Lamarckism is dead, and cannot make any contribution here.
Over to you.
But nice to see you here and it’s nice to have a new chew toy.