The Evolution of Transportation
We start with simple wheels on our feet:
Over the eons of making those same rollerblades, and through chance mistakes in producing them, we somehow added enough material to create a extra large, but better supportive wheel:
Again, through millions of chance mistakes, we added another wheel.
Now extra strength to the frame, and a complex motorized engine has been added. Remember, this has been through random, non-intelligent mistakes we are causing to what we previously were building to add complexity to it.
Ahh! The pinnacle of the two wheels. This will be the last time we see this in our evoulutionary process of transportation
Now we enter the era of three-wheels. This is a short lived period but a shining example of chance.
We now have reached a four-wheel vehicle that has all-weather conditions. The processes are so complex that I would say a divine being created it, but of course that is against what I believe. In Evolution I believe!
And finally, through the billions years of producing parts and accidently putting them together thus creating newer, better inventions with increasing complexity and order, we get to Optimus Prime. The greatest example nature will ever have to show of the power of making mistakes:
Yes, through random, chancy mutations over the course of billions of years we evolved from simple roller skates to Optimus Prime. Where did all the resources come for this extra information? I don't know, but it just does. And that is what is taught as fact....lol.
Does that series of pictures look ridiculous? That is what our "educated" scientists say is how humans came to be. Interesting when in a different light, huh?
Posts
5 comments:
No... that's NOT what evolutionary biologists say. Even if you studied the path of these vehicles creation you would find you have them all out of order, not to mention some don't even go together.
Like bicycles came well before roller blades. Pick-Up trucks did not influence the construction of the M-1a Abrams tank... ever. Your mechanical analogy is simply atrocious, for it to have any logical correlation to evolution you'd have to have your mechanical model make general sense as well. Evolution doesn't even work the way you described it here.
The actually testing, drawing, and design of these machines does loosely follow a path similar to evolution. There are multiple intermediary stages and outright failed designs of these machines. Look up the history of the bicycle and look at all the different designs people made.
In sum, you're point and apparent attempt at a joke falls apart due to inaccuracy and illogical concepts. It WOULD be funny if the joke made sense, but it makes no sense at all because there is no correlation.
"Like bicycles came well before roller blades. Pick-Up trucks did not influence the construction of the M-1a Abrams tank... ever. Your mechanical analogy is simply atrocious, for it to have any logical correlation to evolution you'd have to have your mechanical model make general sense as well. Evolution doesn't even work the way you described it here. "
This is not what I am trying to demonstrate. It is ridiculous to think something with not even enough material could produce something brand new with even more material than what it originally had!
"The actually testing, drawing, and design of these machines does loosely follow a path similar to evolution."
No it doesn't. There is intelligence going into every single one of those designs. It isn't blind construction.
"This is not what I am trying to demonstrate. It is ridiculous to think something with not even enough material could produce something brand new with even more material than what it originally had!"
I know that's not what you're trying to demonstrate, but your demonstration is completely useless at an engineering level of these inventions.
Evolutionarily speaking there IS enough material to create whatever is created. Evolution doesn't make something where there is no material. How do you seriously think evolution works?
"No it doesn't. There is intelligence going into every single one of those designs. It isn't blind construction."
Neither is evolution! But it's guided by environment. And guess what the notion for those designs is ALSO guided by it's environment. A train solves a specific problem of transporting large amounts of goods or people over vast distances.
While the actual machining and development of the train is completely guided by intelligent manufacturing, the evolution of a cell is developed with specific chemical reactions and guess what, they can self replicate. Trains can't, because they are NOT alive. So your engineering design is a terrible analogy because it doesn't actually follow a real world model of what is ACTUALLY happening at an evolutionary level.
For the joke to actually be funny it actually has to make sense and have a grain of truth.
"Neither is evolution! But it's guided by environment."
And the environment is guided by laws of nature, which were laid by something else. What governs these laws? That is the only way to even come close to saying evolution is guided-if there is something guiding it from a far.
M
"And the environment is guided by laws of nature, which were laid by something else. What governs these laws? That is the only way to even come close to saying evolution is guided-if there is something guiding it from a far. "
Wrong. You're making the assumption that there is something else, that some "intelligent foundation" was laid, that's NOT a proof. You have zero data to support such a claim so I do not understand why you are making it.
Post a Comment