Has nature ever created a code?

1227 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
J N Vanderbilt III - how do

J N Vanderbilt III - how do you explain a moth that ends up looking like something that totally benefits it to look like?

By killing a high percentage of moths that look less like the owl, before they can breed. Or in other words: natural selection.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your discussions a few pages back about moths that looks like ten dollar bills got me thinking.

Imagine a computer program that has an image of a 10 dollar bill. Then:

  1. Have it start with an initial population of 1000 random images.
  2. Have it determine which 10% of the population is the closest to the 10 dollar bill.
  3. Have it use this 10% to create the next generation of 1000 but with some random changes.
  4. Repeat B and C for a 1000 generations.

Do you think the 1000th generation might look quite a bit like a 10 dollar bill?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems that in your complaints you keep forgetting step B, C, and D.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Nyar, I believe you used the

Nyar, I believe you used the word “determination” which insinuates intelligence, not randomness. But is a 10 bill$ going to protect a moth, ? No but an owl will and that certainly is Lucky!

Sheldon random mutations = luck, an inescapable fact.

Nyarlathotep's picture
J N Vanderbilt III - Nyar, I

J N Vanderbilt III - Nyar, I believe you used the word “determination” which insinuates intelligence, not randomness.

Yes, its randomness combined with a filtering (natural selection). This filtering is the point you keep missing. If you filter random results, and use the results that pass the filter to select the next generation of random results; you can get outcomes that "looks" intelligent; but that is just an illusion produced by a biased random walk.

Sheldon's picture
Again I invite you to cite a

Again I invite you to cite a single peer reviewed or scientifically validated piece of research or evidence citing luck plays any part of species evolution. You're talking nonsense and you know it.

PMLMAO.

Any explanation how you claim your magic sky fairy created a talking snake and magic apples, or zapped a human instantly into existence with clay yet?

Tic toc, anyone would think you have no explanation...ho hum

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
NS has no creative power you

NS has no creative power you realize? Its all dependant upon what mutations occur. Iow , luck

Sheldon's picture
You don't understand natural

You don't understand natural selection, or species evolution.Not even a basic grasp of the definitions.

Sheldon's picture
"Its all dependant upon what

"Its all dependant upon what mutations occur. Iow , luck"

The abbreviation of it is has an apostrophe ffs, and what the fuck is with that full stop in the middle of a sentnece?

Natural selection is not dependant on anything you clown, environment shapes species not the other way around. Random mutations either give an advantage for surviving in those environments long enough to reproduce, in which case by definition they survive, or they do not in which case they don't. They occur at the genetic level, and are incremental over time. You are pointing at the end result of billions of years of evolution, as if it all happens in a single step, and don't seem to grasp only the most successful mutations are left for us to observe, and over those timescales the animals that possess them are the ones fittest for those environments. Hence survival of the fittest.

This is the most remedial level of understanding of the topic as well, anyone who doesn't know and understand this really shouldn't embarrass themselves by commenting on it, but I guess that ship sailed some time ago for you.

Now it's time for you to repeat your ludicrously stupid claim, as if you're not embarrassing yourself each time, off you go.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
NS has no say in the raw

NS has no say in the raw materials needed for evolution. Tell me how are you going to fashion a wearable dinner jacket if all you have is a jar of molasses or a cup of water? If you’re lucky, a linen mutation will occur but w out it, no can do because all the filtering in the world is insufficient

Your telling me that I don’t grasp NS or species evolution is totally meaningless in this context

Sheldon's picture
Species evolution is an

Species evolution is an entirely insentient process, and whilst mutations are random, natural selection and survival of the fittest are the mechanisms that drive it relentlessly and methodically.

J N Vanderbilt III "Your telling me that I don’t grasp NS or species evolution is totally meaningless in this context"

Your is not an abbreviation of you are, genius, and the sheer stupidity of that claim is a new low even for you and this thread. How can the fact you don't have even the most basic understanding of a subject, and yet are making broad unevidenced assertions about it, not be contextually relevant in a thread that is about that subject?

I may owe you an apology as I seem to have grossly underestimated how dumb you really are. This may not be entirely your fault after all, bless. Here you go...more your speed..

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dstripbook...

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Sheldon “you’re” , (no

Sheldon “you’re” , (no autocorrect there you grammatically correct genius) showing how repetitively stupid you are by continually harping on how evolution works, a tired evotard narrative that doesn’t even apply here.
So you finally admitted mutations are random. This speaks volumes!!!!! NS is powerless to create ANYTHING, totally relying on the LUCKY hand dealt by LUCKY mutations so see if you can get that through your evotard head
No?

Nyarlathotep's picture
J N Vanderbilt III - So

J N Vanderbilt III - So [Sheldon] finally admitted mutations are random.

He told you mutations are random weeks ago.

Sheldon's picture
J N Vanderbilt III "So you

J N Vanderbilt III "So you finally admitted mutations are random."

I have stated this from the very start, you really are the mother and father of all liars, even for a creatard. Here's a post stating it from 4 days ago, and another from 7 days ago. You're not christian at all are you?

Sun, 01/06/2019 - 12:18 Sheldon "A mutation is a change in a gene or chromosome. **Mutations arise spontaneously** and happen continually. A mutation rarely creates a new phenotype, but if the phenotype is suited to a particular environment, it can lead to rapid change in a species."

Thu, 01/03/2019 - 23:36
Sheldon "There's no luck involved, only **random mutations."

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/has-nature-ever-create...

You also still haven't explained how your deity created a talking snake and magic apples?

You haven't explained either why you claimed sequences ARE codes, and yet they clearly are not?

Nor have you told us if you accept the objective scientific fact that the universe over 13 billion years old?

You're a coward who avoids answering any questions, and a liar who misrepresents what others have posted, and of course lie continuously that evolution involves luck, but when asked to cite a single peer reviewed piece of scientific evidence that claims luck is involved you run away like the all cowardly lying creationists.

One wonders what you hope to gain by lying to people who unlike you know better?

arakish's picture
I was at me doctor

I was at me doctor appointment in the waiting room reading the new posts in this thread. Talk about attracting attention to one's self when one cannot control the laughter as jnv3 continues to spew as if by simple non-ending repetition is going to get his fallacious arguments believed.

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Another good belly laugh relieves a lot of tension.

rmfr

EDIT: misspellings

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Arakish

@ Arakish

Well, I tried to help JNV3 by giving him links to what I thought were simple videos outlining the basics of evolution. Sadly they were too intellectually challenging for him. Short of an arrangement of wooden bricks (as if for toddlers) I can't think of any other way to get the educational point across.

JNV3's "ideas" are culled (Plagiarised) from second rate preachers and fourth rate apologists. Not one original argument or idea has he posted on this forum. Like many creatards who cling to the one discredited idea, if we demolish/discredit it (which we all have) then they are left adrift in the harsh sea of reality with no rescue except that much despised lifeboat the "Education".

JNV3's OP and subsequent histrionics have resulted in everything posted being thoroughly and comprehensively debunked. We are now reduced to watching JNV3 endlessly repeating a single erroneous phrase while Sheldon patiently points out lies, inaccuracies and falsifications. Nothing has been learnt from the creatard side and nothing educational has been absorbed by the propounder of the creationist foolishness. .

When I write 'nothing" I should immediately correct myself by saying what has been learnt by any observer is the character of JNV3. The lack of morality and ethical behaviour is reflected in the casual mendacity of many posts, the attempts to redefine common words, and the brazen 'shifting of goalposts' when utterly debunked. It is not a pretty, or edifying spectacle.

I should imagine any wavering theist could be utterly repelled by the brash and ignorant arguments presented here on the creationist side. What a teacher involved in the education of the OP must feel.......

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Sheldon I don’t have to

Sheldon I don’t have to explain God, although I did, for the sake of argument let’s say God doesn’t exist
Now you still can’t explain how perfect looking owls eyes and accompanying features appear on a moth in a perfect unison w the moth’s need for such predator protection. Oh how I love the coincidence

BTW Sheldon you do admit you are a grammatical genius right? You are such a genius you can point out a spellchecker’s mistakes , hats off to you genius!!!!

Sheldon's picture
There is no explanation for a

There is no explanation for a mythical bronze age deity used magic to create humans from clay in an instant, because it is an unevidenced and risible superstition. That's why ot has no explanatory power whatsoever.

Check mate, with or without species evolution your creation myth is an empty bag, a naked emperor yoou're pretending has clothes by looking the other way, anywhere where you can pretend it stands up to any scrutiny. Hence your deflection in attacking sciennce.

How many scientific facts do you deny that don't in any way refute any part of your religious beliefs?

It's none isn't it, PMLMAO.

You are funny...

arakish's picture
@ J N Vanderbilt III

@ J N Vanderbilt III

OP Question: Has nature ever created a code?

Only possible and applicable answer: NO!!

Otherwise present your OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit non ei qui negat.

rmfr

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Lots of logical evidence of

Lots of logical evidence of God, but at issue is the REMARKABLE COINCIDENCE of the owl artistry resting on a moth and you cannot address it logically, eh?

Sheldon's picture
PMLMAO, no logical evidence

PMLMAO, no logical evidence for god, no evidence for god, no explanation for god, just puerile bronze age myths about zapping humans into existence instantly from clay using magic an talking snakes.

Now how many scientific facts that don't refute any part of your superstitious beliefs do you deny? Oh yeah, not a single solitary one, hahahahahahhahahahahaha....uh....oh...another irony overload....I'm gonna need a bigger gloat.....:-)

So did god use magic to recreate an intact hymen on Mary's snatch after she gave birth? He's a supernatural gynaecologist, PMLMAO.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Like I said plenty of

Like I said plenty of evidence logically for the existence of God I’ll be happy to discuss eventually, but let’s discuss was gnawing at you right now and that is the remarkable coincidence of owl artistry sitting on the moth wings, do you admit it’s pure coincidence? ?

Sheldon's picture
Yes, like you said, just like

Yes, you said, you love to keep making ludicrous unevidenced claims, but that's creatards for you. Just like you say a bronze age deity created humans, using magic, from clay, with a fucking talking snake. PMLMAO.

Seriously it's been years, do they lobotomise people to swallow that hilarious nonsense or what? Logical evidence funny as fuck, you said you have your own logic ffs, try a dictionary and look up logic, get one of your teachers (not a god botherer ffs) to explain why a method of reasoning that adheres to strict principles of validation can't be open to personal interpretation.

PMLMAO, seriously you're either trolling or taking dumb pills.

So did Jesus magic his mother's snatch re-closed when he was born then? How does that work? What about this talking snake, explain the biological evidence for how your magic sky fairy zapped that into existence?

You creatards, fair play, funny as fuck.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Heh heh Can’t answer huh? Do

Heh heh Can’t answer huh? Do the words “pure coincidence” really gnaw at you?
Maybe some other godless atheist might dare ?

Pure coincidence, oh my

Sheldon's picture
So you still haven't told us

So you still haven't told us how your sky fairy created magic apples and talking snakes?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ jnv3

@ jnv3

You have been answered by several "godless atheists". Each time you post. you have been debunked. You keep posting the same vapid shite when you have been answered, you have had videos for high schoolers, links and books recommended to you. Which you admitted were above your limited understanding. And still you keep on.

There comes a point when stupid becomes fucking moronic...you have streaked past that marker like rat with its tail on fire.

You are nothing but a dullard and irritating troll, with enormous ego and catastrophic character defects.

Either learn from all the educational goodies that we have all patiently set out for you or just fuck off with your delusions. I am done with you..

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
I have but let’s pretend he

I have but let’s pretend he doesn’t exist, so pure coincidence? Or not?

Sheldon's picture
Coincidence isn't objectively

Coincidence isn't objectively real, its just the way humans perceive things, like luck. Neither concept has anything to do with the probability of an event. Until you grasp this you will continue to make a fool of yourself. Though ironically you appear to think you've been poking fun at people who actually do understand it.

Now, magic apples, evidence and explanation please? Enthral us all with your acumen.

arakish's picture
J N Vanderbilt III: "I have

J N Vanderbilt III: "I have but let’s pretend he doesn’t exist, so pure coincidence? Or not?"

You have what?

Pretend who doesn't exist?

Pure coincidence? What is coincidence?

Or not? What is not?

rmfr

Sheldon's picture
We've seen this lie enough

We've seen this lie enough times now, same old tactic. They breeze in here and make grandiose claims they have evidence for a deity, when asked for it they offer nothing, after a long time wasted on endless repetitions of their claim they cite a woeful first cause argument or maybe a creationist propaganda lie they've hoovered up from one of their sites. Everyone laughs and points out it is nonsense and not remotely evidence, they offer no credible response, then when enough time has passed they start to pretend they have evidenced a deity, and that you either missed it or are denying the "evidence". I've been encountering apologists who use this tactic for years, and still have no idea what they think they will achieve.

Look AJ777, when I asked him for his best piece of evidence for a deity he lied about me and claimed I had no interest in evidence, talk about a poisoning the well fallacy. Then after pages of others making the same request the best he could produce was the risible first cause or Kalam cosmological argument, it's not even an argument for a deity, but for a first cause, and the clue is in the fucking name. You have to laugh really, I mean they wouldn't accept such nonsense as evidence for any other deity, and I have seen both christians and muslims use it on here and elsewhere, hilarious, but all very sad really.

arakish's picture
@ Sheldon

@ Sheldon

Agree with everything you wrote. I also have been seeing these same tactics for over half a century. Damn you know you are old when you refer to things in "centuries." Damn!

Damn how did I word it? Religious Absolutists are full of hope but empty of promise? Hmm... Seems close but anybody can see what that means.

And I do love how they will spiel on and on and on use that, "I already said that tactic."

The absolute idiocy and stupidity of Religious Absolutists and Apologists still amazes me to this day. And what really knocks me flat LMAO, is that, even with the WWW, they still refuse to avail themselves of any knowledge that torpedoes their beliefs. And that is the true EVIL of religion. [You reading other threads AJ?]

It is truly heartbreaking, to the point I want to literally cry, to see people so brainwashed by the evil of religion... I have no words.

And I always tell Religious Absolutists that if they were to truly read the Bible using critical thinking, then they will see they are actually worshiping the Evil One and not some omnibenevolent entity.

rmfr

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Ah so coincidence is just a

Ah so coincidence is just a human concept? Is everything you can think a human concept too?

If I won powerball 8 times in a row would that be just a human concept?
The fact that an owl’s likeness is on the moth, which is exactly what it needs, is just a human concept? What probability are we talking here, a believable one? You obviously want to ignore this because it makes evolution look like it’s getting some grand assistance

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.