Isnt camoflage (the ability of animals to hide using their various characteristics and outter surface) alone, proof enough for u to believe that God exsists. If u say its a coincidencethen that u yourself very well know that its bull. Coz anyone with the least bit of common sense would deny that it cant be coincidence. And if you believe that the creaters just created stuff for thei survival...then grow one hair on your body using your will. What do u say to this.
2007-03-29
07:45:16
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I meant "can be coincidence"
2007-03-29
07:46:12 ·
update #1
You are not ansering my question. If u know so much about evolution why dont u go ahead and explain ur answer and solve the riddle I presented to u above.
2007-03-29
07:51:38 ·
update #2
Your proof:"The animals that had poor camoflauge got spotted and eaten. the ones that couldn't be seen as well proliferated."
Ok the ones that "had poor camoflage got eaten??" But my question is about the stronger ones : "who gave the stronger ones protection?"
2007-03-29
07:54:53 ·
update #3
I believe in God, but the existence of camoflage does not prove God. Things don't happen simply because creatures will them to, these things happen and creatures use them to their advantage.
Although the odds may be high, it doesn't mean that it couldn't happen. The odds are high agaist being dealt a royal flush in poker, but once in that very great time, it does happen.
2007-03-29 07:51:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by The Doctor 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Camouflage has been demonstrated to be evolutionary. People ask, what good is 6% camouflage? Well from a certain distance it's less visible than 5% camouflage, so they get eaten less. Evolution is a very slow, gradual process. Due to natural genetic variations in children (for instance some of your kids may be taller or shorter than you - same with camouflage some may be more or less disguised than you, and those with the 7% disguise will be eaten even less often). You obviously have no idea how it works though....
And Natural Selection is the OPPOSITE of coincidence. It's *selection* which is the opposite of chance. There is no way evolution could occur through blind chance and luck, but no evolutionist has ever claimed it works that way. It's a very specific and tailored filter.
And your idea that "creators" created stuff for their survival, you're think of Lamarckism, which was defeated a long time ago by Darwin. Just goes to show how uneducated you are on the subject.
I suggest, if you want it explained very clearly, you go to youtube and search "Dawkins Climbing Mount Improbable" and watch all 8 segments in order (it's not too long). It's a children's lecture so it's very clear and simple. You will learn a lot and change your mind, I guarantee it.
2007-03-29 14:58:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mike K 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
i am very puzzled by your reasoning here. the creator very kindly gave the littler animals camoflauge so they could hide from the bigger animals and avoid being eaten? but the creator also made bigger animals that need to eat those littler animals in order to survive? so the little one are not happy about being eaten, the big ones are not happy at how hard it is to find the little ones which run away and hide, so why create all this trouble in the first place? why not just make bigger animals which are happy just to eat grass which is easy to find and doesnt run away and hide, the little ones can relax because noone wants to eat them, and now everyone is happy!
(well, except for the grass, maybe)
so what i mean to say is, what exactly has been created here except a whole lot of unhappiness?
2007-03-29 15:46:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by waif 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not coincidence. Lets say the ancestor of the Squid didn't have Camouflage. During one of the genetic mutations part of the species had allowed for it to change color. This made that part of the species harder to find for its predator, thus the it was the one who survived ( survival of the fittest). Since the Camouflage squid had a greater chance of survive it had a greater chance of reproduction, and thus making camouflage an asset. The part of the species that didn't have camouflage died out. Its not coincidence, it is survival. It's not that hard to understand. So now that leaves the proof of evolution.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BXdQRvSdLAs
Take a look at this for some proof of evolution.
2007-03-29 15:02:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by Magus 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
1st: "who gave the stronger ones protection?"
it's not protection. they just can avoid being eaten so easily
2nd: "And if you believe that the creaters just created stuff for thei survival...then grow one hair on your body using your will":
"will"?
what is "will" for you?
the first cells found an already prepared environment. This environment was prepared by basic organic synthetic chemical reactions (really easy to happen anytime / anywhere). The first cells did not "want" to find their substrates. they happened to be there. lucky them. end of story. simple isn't it?
3rd: Read some organic chemistry and biochem, just the basics.. it's really easy. and it will help you UNDERSTAND evolutionary biology, which you do not.
2007-03-29 15:51:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by E.T. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Design doesn't have to be intelligent. That's the point you're missing. Evolution is variation plus selection, just like intelligent design (we come up with lots of possible ideas, keep what works and reject what doesn't work).
You have a lot of work to do. I suggest reading The Origin of Species first. Then read the updated version by Steve Jones called Almost Like a Whale. When you've enjoyed those, dip into some of Richard Dawkins' earlier books. Good luck.
2007-03-29 14:49:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Whenever this is brought up in Church or one of my Bible study groups I always use an example I got off the show "Touched by an Angel". The example used was what if you were walking thru the woods and you came upon a stump with a pocketwatch sitting on it. The watch had the perfect time and ran smoothly. Would you think that the watch assembled itself on the stump over time or that someone must of placed it on the stump? I, for one, firmly believe that God created this Earth for us. He designed everything and created everything in our universe. Man can not create man. God creates man.
2007-03-29 14:54:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Camoflauge isnt coincidence. Its evolution. DUH! It certainly isnt proof of God's existence...
Did you know there is a type of wasp that repeatedly stings a catepillar so as to paralyze it - but not kill it. It then lays its eggs inside the body of the catepillar, so that when its eggs hatch, its young can feast on the living flesh of the catepillar. Disgusting isnt it? Perhaps it seems a bit cruel too? And your God created that??? Tasmanian Devils have 4 teets, and give birth to 6-8 young. They can only feed four, so you know what they do? They EAT THEIR OWN BABIES. God created them too, right? What a freakin monster he must be to create something that survives in such a fashion.
Or, maybe God isnt real and evolution is what would create something so indifferent to life. Nature isnt cruel or evil - just indifferent.
2007-03-29 14:52:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 5
·
5⤊
1⤋
It's not a 'coincidence'.
For my logic- it's proof that evolution works. The animals that had poor camoflauge got spotted and eaten. the ones that couldn't be seen as well proliferated.
2007-03-29 14:50:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Morey000 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
There is NO proof that God exists.
I agree with you though, I believe that God was the big bang that started life. Camouflage on animals is a product of evolution.
2007-03-29 14:51:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7
·
1⤊
1⤋