reply to post by Bedlam
I did not know that. That makes a lot of sense to build in a self correcting error , nature is a pretty efficient mechanism. Thanks for that tidbit
I find it very interesting and wonder how this applies to the research.
edit on 17-10-2013 by CitizenJack because: (no reason
edit on 17-10-2013 by CitizenJack because: (no reason given)
Your reply here reminds me of a mystery I have not been able to yet resolve. It's a mystery concerning the thinking process behind statements like the
one you made. You probably didn't mean it in this sense, but a lot of people certainly do.
Why do people talk about nature like it is a conscious force? A tangible, constantly acting force, that drives our progression. But not only that,
people who talk about it in this sense are often the most DIE HARD ATHIESTS and anti-religious personalities I know. According to our beloved current
scientific paradigm (wouldn't want to upset that on here), all our progress to this stage by the 'natural' process of evolution was ACCIDENTAL. That
correction mechanism isn't there for efficiency, nope, it's an accident (like the millions of other accidents upon accidents upon accidents) that
nature churned out that actually turned out to not only be useful but light years ahead of anything we, CONSCIOUS/THINKING HUMANS, have done.
In fact, EVERYTHING nature has 'accidentally' or 'naturally' done is mostly light years ahead of us. Remember, we are conscious. Nature isn't
conscious, it's a number running machine if anything. That number running machine created the most impressive thing in the entire universe - our body
- along with a genius 3-DIMENSIONAL 4-BIT CODE called DNA. Let's not forget this amazing computer code has existed for possibly billions upon billions
of years, and nature seemingly didn't have too much trouble implementing this, or should I say nature didn't have too much trouble accidentally
scrambling a bunch of atoms together in a very impressive way. We, on the other hand, as conscious, rational and to be honest GOD-LIKE creatures in
comparison to unconscious, non-driven and accidental nature, took ~2 million years to get to the point where we can even make 2-DIMENSIONAL 2-BIT
code, let alone spawn the biological brilliance that is our universe. We are only just now discovering the possibility of self-assembling machinery.
This has taken us thousands of years worth of knowledge, blood, sweat and tears across a WHOLE RANGE OF DIFFERENT FIELDS, yet of course, nature
accidentally created the most impressive self-assembling and REPRODUCING machine in the universe from pretty much day-1 of life, which has led to this
- the human body. We could only DREAM of such an invention, regardless how far we are with
physics/chemistry/electronics/computing/nanotechnology/manufacturing and so forth and so forth.
Remember, nature does all of this accidentally. Yeah, I know it sounds absurd sometimes, but remember guys, this is Darwinism! And we love Darwinism!
Oh let's not forget, even though nature is a random number churning accidental machine that just happens to work alongside a platform that allows it
to manifest in actual meaningful and progressive ways, given enough time ANYTHING WILL HAPPEN (but let's never ask what provides the probabilities and
what assigns them to the corresponding events, besides the actual platform for these things to manifest on). That's our neat little way of wrapping up
(Btw that's one of my favourite sayings - 'oh it naturally happened', it's like a magic word that means no further understanding is required - it IS
AS BAD of an excuse as just saying 'God did it', of course many would deny this strongly).
Why is 'nature' talked about in this way by some? They do it without even realising. My favourite example is hearing a stone-cold atheist talk about
evolution and say things such as 'polar bears are white because nature knew to give them white fur in the arctic' LOL. This is ABSURD! People do it
unconsciously most of the time, and you'd be surprised how many people aren't actually even aware that evolution (macro/genetical - doesn't matter) is
COMPLETELY ACCIDENTAL. THERE IS ZERO DRIVING FORCE ACCORDING TO OUR UNDERSTANDING. NONE WHATSOEVER. At least this is DARWIN'S THEORY. Which many
people defend to the grave. If you believe evolution works in another way (micro-evolution is a different story now, since we understand epigenetics
now but macro-evolution still fails into the 'accidental' category) then you may as well be a creationist, since you are not anymore believing in our
BELOVED DARWINISTIC view of life.
'Nature is efficient' - 'It makes sense for nature to do that' - 'Nature gave us this/gave that animal this'
Do people not realise, that by speaking of nature in this way, you are speaking of a creator/a designer/a GOD. You are speaking of it as a force that
drives the progression of this universe. That CANNOT EXIST INHERENTLY by our understanding. Such an existence would be nothing less than a God.
Nature can't think, it can't plan, it can't implement improvements based on drawbacks. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that
everyone actually believes in a creator, except for they use the words nature and put it down to genetics and evolution, and that makes them feel good
because that way they are not one of those 'silly religious nuts believing in fairy tales'.
Regardless, I am not here to promote or demote any ideas of natural evolution/spirituality/or any form of creationism.
I am merely just commenting on something I see a lot. Once again, not directed specifically at you, but the way you worded your sentence reminded me
of this irk I have. I am a believer of evolution, though I believe Darwin was wrong (perhaps not fully aware would be a better phrase) about a few
things, and I believe evolution MIGHT BE a process fundamentally ingrained into our universe, much like the fundamental forces in physics, rather than
a fanciful word for a series of accidents following apparent miracles (original formation of the unbelievable manufacturing and factory production we
call simple life, or even the building blocks of life themselves, or even the genetic code and so forth and so forth), that science is still
explaining one step at a time going backwards billions of years.
The thing about science (I love it, I hold a Masters in Engineering), is that once we discovered it we pretty much dismissed all other ideologies we
had, and started fresh. It's a catch up game now. The 'how' eventually will hit a wall and curl back up into a 'Why'.
On another note; that study is sheer brilliance. The schematics of this system we call life are truly beautiful, yet I worry that we are aiming to
have more control over it than we should. The realm of creating and configuring species in whole new ways should probably be left to our virtual
worlds (games won't be too far off the grade of detail of our universe soon enough). The potential for good is great, but the potential for bad is
very worrying. But hey ho, who am I to complain. A mere single human, what progression can I alter.
edit on 18-10-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-10-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason
edit on 18-10-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)