DS: Which book are you reading?
serious question for evolutionist,
Maybe George Lucas got it right in Star Wars and there's civilisations all over the universe with lesser beings and higher beings. Or something like Star Trek or Dr. Who....
Let's start with a simpler question.
Do you know what evolution is?
Do you know how evolution works?
Do you why evolution works?
Evolution is the truth by Jerry Coyle (i think thats his name). I took a break im go na look up the theodices for a bit instead
J Hofer.....x-man, cyborg, whatever.
MadGiant--is that question for me?
unstopableravens; Any chance of you evolving the normal human characteristic of rational thinking?
USR may be onto something here, since he's seemingly developed a superhumanlike ability to resist evidence, needed to protect his faith.
> J Hofer.....x-man, cyborg, whatever.
that's a huge difference. unstoppableravens talks about natural evolving into some supernatural being, which of course can't happen. but cyborgs eventually will happen, we are already able to replace or improve parts of our body with technological applications. technology is a form of evolution too and might well influence our own natural evolution. for example, if we get used to exoskeletons, future generations probably are no longer dependent on legs and/or arms the way we are.
I know you're just winding them up... looks like you succeeded.
I think you give Ravens way too much credit. I think he really thinks people who believe in evolution believe humans will develop X-Men abilities in the future.
J Hofer said-
for example, if we get used to exoskeletons, future generations probably are no longer dependent on legs and/or arms the way we are.
Of course, as humanity gets better at compensating for evolution's effects, we ironically will become more dependent on such technologies, since we actually encourage dependence on external devices.
An obvious example is the development of eyeglasses to correct for refractive errors (myopia, etc). Having poor eyesight due to myopia USED to be a factor that evolution could select against (eg by not seeing a predator coming to attack, vs the other guy with good distance vision who spotted the predator and took evasive actions to avoid getting eaten!). But now that glasses are available to most humans (over the past 300 years, and mostly within the last 150 years), the genes that contibute to nearsightedness are not as much of a factor, so the multiple genes which contribute to refractive error are increasing in the gene pool; the incidence of refractive error increases (as more people pass along their genes), and we're actually statistically more dependent on artificial interventions (like LASIK, eyeglasses, contacts, etc).
BTW, there is no such thing as 'devolution': change happens to fit the environment, and there's no reason or need to insert such value judgments into the process of adaptation.