Attention biology nerds

Attention biology nerds Jan 12, 2018 22:02:51 GMT

Quote

Post by phludowin on Jan 12, 2018 22:02:51 GMT

Jan 12, 2018 20:51:06 GMT Lugh said:

Jan 12, 2018 20:16:32 GMT theoncomingstorm said:

It wasn't creationism, just something as ridiculous as creationism. He thought mutations arose to respond to environmental changes as though there is some sort of planning involved.

I never mentioned planning at all.

Quote me where I mentioned or implied planning.

With pleasure.

Lugh said:

Would you not agree that the presence of a certain challenge to an organism can cause the development of a trait that not only helps the organism deal with that challenge but also to deal with another challenge it is currently facing that it has no cause and effect relationship like that with?

After all we know evolutionary responses are either suboptimal or nonexistent to certain challenges. So it is not theoretically impossible for there to be adaptions like that.

It seems to me that if we accept that

1.there is a cause and effect relationship between the presence of challenges and adaptions
2.Responses to challenges are either suboptimal or nonexistent.
3.A trait can help deal with more than one challenges

That it is absolutely possible for such an idea to be true.
If there is no cause and effect then how do you explain that?

Suggesting cause and effect heavily implies that the challenges in the environment cause mutations. Assuming from there that the mutations is intentional is not a big leap.

Also:

Lugh said:

If we change an organisms environment it will, within generations adapt to face new challenges posed by that new environment.

This also implies intentional adaptation, aka planning.

Another thing: Asking for quotes after you deleted the posts in question is pretty dishonest in my opinion. Luckily for honesty, other posters quoted you.