Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?

Jump to Last Post 151-184 of 184 discussions (1304 posts)

67
ceciliabeltranposted 14 years ago
Is evolution mechanistic or intuitive? I think that's the real topic. If its mechanistic, then it is like a computer that upgrades itself. If it is intuitive, then its a network of organisms that perpetuate an ongoing awareness preserved from the time it began its journey through the transfer of genes.

I think its intuitive. I feel it is intuitive. My right brain (creative side) tells me its intuitive but so does empirical evidence and the knowledge provided by the scientists who study it day by day.

is it mechanistic? yes it is too. observe cellular automata--its mathematical! that is the funny thing, because our intelligence is also mechanistic and intuitive. half of the time we are conscious and half of the time we are unconscious. This is the nature of life.

So the answer to this question is It is both. Does it prove that Gd exists, no. Does it prove that there is no Gd, no.

It just proves that what we are arguing about is really whether we are intelligent or ignorant. once again---half of us are intelligent half the time and half of us are ignorant half the time.
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Which would leave patterns to follow, something mechanistic and random or something nonrandom and intuitive?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  random by definition has no discernable pattern. intuitive by definition is not pattern, it adjusts. so really? an intuitive response will be lateral and not based on pattern but on creativity, a new way of responding to things. A mechanistic response is predictable and progressive.
  
  Evolution is both predictable and intuitive. It is predictable half the time and then it assaults reason sometimes.
  
  What does this imply? That evolution behaves like the evolution of human knowledge. we adopt a belief, then we abandon it. We pursue the thesis that survives until it is declared fact. then out of the blue something props up the knowledge tree from nowhere like quantum physics....then in one camp, it organizes again back to an evolved version of determinism. Science branch out of philosophy into various fields of science as life branched out of the first eukaryotes. Literature branched out into various genres from the bible, the first massed produced book.
  
  All is interconnected. All flows from a source and branches out the same way a tree branches out of a seed, to form new seeds. This is the unified pattern of all the knowledge in the world as well as life in the world.
  
  Is it mechanistic, or is it intuitive. It is both. that is its design. The process of evolution is the design of evolution. It is the mechanism of intuitive response of life for the purpose of living.
  reply report
76
Bard of Elyposted 14 years ago
You only have to look around to see an intelligence we cannot comprehend that has designed each living thing! I don't see how anyone can not see the incredible intelligence in the world we live in, its design and all that is in it!
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Ely, I think I agree. None of the "intelligent elite" have answered how they believe they are intelligent without having an intelligent design.
  reply report
2. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Ely!
  reply report
3. 54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  When one looks out their window, they can presume the world is flat, But, when we actually take a good hard look at the world, we find it is not flat.
  
  The same applies to living things. They may appear designed by an intelligence but when taking a good hard look at them, we find no evidence for design whatsoever.
  
  I might suggest you stop just looking out your window for a change.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  the odd thing about this argument is it can be used both ways. To somebody who standing in the horizon, no amount of discourse can convince him that the world is round, until he has himself circumnavigated the world. It will be beyond him. Show him the path of stars and present to him equations and he will not buy the idea. He is stuck to his own perceptions of the world.
  
  the idea that evolution is intelligent is not obvious to somebody who views intelligence from a human perspective, as in talking and writing woowoo. But as you go up the rung of understanding, namely what causes the phenomenon of intelligence, you will see that it is actually a product of alpha and theta waves, alternating states of awareness generated by charged chemicals such as potassium ions that fire when agitated the way electrons do when they release photons.
  
  At this level of observation, you then see the relationship of that which you call consciousness to phenomenon that can be observed in equal measure to things we "believe" are not possessing consciousness.
  
  Time and time again, scientists are challenging their definitions of life itself because in some definitions, even stars may be considered alive for they
  have life spans very similar to organic life.
  
  I suggest, you understand the para-physiology of intelligence first before you can call yourself an accurate judge of what is intelligent.
  reply report
60
Merlin Fraserposted 14 years ago
What an interest thread this has been, as a late comer I wasn't around when it started so wasn't able to throw my two cents worth into the ring.

I love science of geology, archaeology and so forth and how like peeling the layers of an onion mankind expands the very knowledge of our existence.

Like so many people I was intrigued when I first came across Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and the origin of species and was not at all surprised at the initial reaction of the churchmen at the time. What does surprise and baffle me is the continued opposition to what are now well documented proofs of Darwin’s theories.

I hold no strong religious beliefs, one way or the other and believe everyone has a fundamental right to follow whatever path they chose. If for some the clock stopped some six thousand years ago and nothing ever thought or written since the Bible has any meaning whatsoever that’s entirely up to them.

As I grew older and sought out knowledge in many contentious disciplines I discovered how much more logical and therefore believable things became when you take both God and the Bible out of the equation.

The proof of evolution is all around us for all who open their eyes to see it. We evolved... are still evolving; not to do so is to go against the very nature of being.
reply report
76
Tyrone Smallsposted 14 years ago
What was created by God was created once and only once. A theory is a theory! Someone's opinion. When you can show me a skeleton of monkey w/a tail, then a skeleton of a 3/4 monkey and 1/4 man w/a tail, then a monkey 1/2 man with a tail, then 1/4 monkey and 3/4 man w/a tail, then man, then I'll believe. . . A cat is a cat, a dog is a dog, a bird is a bird. They may evolve, but they are one species.

"Ylynd"
reply report
1. 58
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
2. 79
  thisisoliposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Have you even looked at skeletal evidence, there is plenty of evolutionary evidence via fossil records showing how humans have evolved, along with other animals, including dogs.
  reply report
93
Susana Sposted 14 years ago
Oh dear, another person who doesn't understand the basics of evolution, lol :LOL:
reply report
1. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The dispute is not whether evolution is not real, the dispute is whether it is random or there by intelligent design.
  
  The two camps (okay 3)
  
  1. evolution is proof of intelligent design, because it is a process that resembles intelligence as we know it.
  
  2. evolution is mechanistic and a great big fortunate accident born out of probability, as classically championed by Richard Dawkins, the poster child for militant atheism and evolution as a mindless vehicle for the transfer of genes.
  
  3. it doesn't matter where the argument goes as long as the heckler looks smarter than the rest who makes him feel dumb.
  
  So if someone here has a better understanding of evolution, feel free to do more than LOL. many people will ignore you, but some will learn from it and they won't even post anything, they'll just read.
  reply report
  58
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Wrong
  
  That is not the dispute at all. lololo
  
  Woo woo!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think that was a pretty close summary.
  reply report
  93
  Susana Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  I don't think the guy who's waiting for dogs to grow chicken legs or a monkey to grow a human head is worth anything more than LOL! I haven't the time to educate people that clearly just take their facts from some preacher who knows nothing. If people want to learn about evolution there's plenty for them to read, unfortunately someone with the kind of belief previously stated is not going to do that no matter what I do or don't say.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Evolution is proof that we are SLOWLY evolving to become more aware - from the inside out. It is such a slow process, seeking...seeking...seeking, but yet, to only find that the objective is to simply see that we are all unified, after all. Although, I rebel against y'all crazy bastards... Ha-ha!
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Welcome to the new people that joined the thread.
reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
The ones that dismiss intelligence and design, but believe you are intelligent, how did you become intelligent? Is your intelligence random or do you design your intelligence?
reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
The many atheist scientists, so many read books, so little thoughtful answers.
reply report
1. 58
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Woo woo I believe X - disprove it, LOLOLOLOL
  
  Too lazy marine. Too lazy.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I am far from lazy. Sorry to disappoint you. If I was lazy, I would have given in to the mob a long time ago.
  You are lazy in not writing any original ideas. You don't even answer what part of evolution you believe I am so confused about.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Mark, can you give me advice on how to make the cupcakes fluffier?
  reply report
  58
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Talk to them.
  reply report
  68
  Paradise7posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You talk to your cupcakes, Mark? No WONDER you have issues...
  
  just kidding
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  yes they would make much more sense than you.
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think that Mark makes so much sense that he gets responses like that! Pathetic!
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  he does have good recipes earnest. check them out.
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes I have seen his recipes, his websites, and have communicated with him for some 2 years now.
  I like Mark, unlike many posting on the religious threads, he has an IQ above 10!
  reply report
  66
  Faybe Bayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Baby!
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Fabe baby! How ya doin?
  reply report
  66
  Faybe Bayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I am learning to chat on Fubar...
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I had to google that Faybe.
  reply report
  66
  Faybe Bayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If you want I will send you an invite. It's a cool place to post your hubpages link. And it's free, and if you join I level up... I don't care about leveling up. I'm still trying to figure out how to post my link...
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you Faybe, I trust your judgement. Take me to your leader!
  report
  66
  Faybe Bayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You've got mail.
  report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you Faybe!
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  yeah all of us have an IQ above what we've displayed so far in this thread....it just keeps going and going and going you know. at some point you wonder why you ever bother.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Cecilia, I figured you'd like fruit, since you're so "fruity" and/or such a "fruit-loop"... ha-ha!
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  where is the fruit coming from? please tell me it didn't come ex-nihilo. you're the one with a split personality obscure.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I hope I'm versatile. Unlike some of the mechanical speaking, educated idiots, and textbook warriors with no thoughts of their own, some of us have a personality that splits amid the variety within this thing we call "life." Thanks for the predictable compliments, by the way.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  there is nothing wrong with knowing what you are talking about.
  reply report
2. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  oh i didn't see this.marine. I was just thinking that. there is so much more interesting angles to argue their position, but so far....cricket cricket.
  reply report
68
Paradise7posted 14 years ago
Obscurely, I don't think it's really an either-or proposition. I don't think evolution is either intelligent or ignornant. It's a natural response to a natural challenge.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Are you talking to the fruit-loops or to me? I've already stated, many, many threads back, that evolution is independent from all of this other hogwash.
  Read, please, then get back to me.
  reply report
  68
  Paradise7posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Look at the title of the forum thread. Read, please, then get back to me.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No sh*t, I didn't like it either... LOL!
  reply report
2. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  By the way, this is Mr. Marine's forum idea...as I've also already stated numerous times, the initial question was confusing and should have been rephrased. AND, he has did so, many times thus far...
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  and yet, you are drawn to it like a fly to sh--!
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And you landed where...and onto what??? LOL!
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  in a grand waste of time.
  reply report
68
Paradise7posted 14 years ago
Okay, okay. Don't get the knickers in a twist. My word, we're a bit sensitive today...you used exactly the same expression to me.

I do understand your point, and I'm coming down, (surprising to myself) on the side of the mechanistic rather than the intelligent response to the challenge of maintaining and perpetuating life. I think you are, too.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No-no, I'm not sensitive at all; I'm very responsive... Ha-ha! Coming down? No, I quit marijuana a long time ago... LOL!
  reply report
2. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Paradise, if is indeed just mechanistic, then why did it mechanize to preserve itself? what would be its motivation. To live, right? why? to go on living? why?to pass on genes? why? to preserve something it learned that will be useful to go on living. why? to learn some more about living? why....well why do we live? why do you want to live? there are many reasons. you want to wake up and see your wife beside you, or your girlfriend or your friends. you want to preserve your memory of them. even the smallest and simplest organism wants to live for reasons outside of its biological reasons. it wants to live because it knows it is alive and it feels alive. it wants to preserve what it knows, hence the evolution of the act of reproducing. it does not want to forget. hence it is intelligent in a rudimentary way. evolution was motivated by knowing and memory. otherwise why do we have it in us and why did genes form to begin with? it has a specific function and that function is to remember. the need was formed before the function.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Paradise, Thanks for your response. Why do you think it can't be considered ignorant or intelligent? How does a process develop ignorant and intelligent products without the process being ignorant or intelligent?
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think Paradise was claiming a neutrality of nothingness? I mean, really...we all should know it has to be at least something. Ha-ha!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe it could be both ignorant and intelligent if driven by the conscious. The conscious is both ignorant and intelligent at times it seems.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Wouldn't that relate to when I mentioned about us being under non-random forces that hold our random elements?
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It seems that something is holding something seeming that most to all things are dependent on dependency. It also seems to me that dependency leans to "nonrandom" with independent leaning towards random. I don't know if that had anything to do with your question. I think your idea makes sense though, it seems most to all things work in a natural balance, being under nonrandom forces with random elements would be a natural balance.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Kiss-kiss, hug-hug; I'll take compliments in any direction - as within this forum, you seem to stay. Thanks for the concurrence, by the way.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  How does it feel to kiss a St. Bernard? I am sorry about the drool.
  You are welcome. Now you gotta explain why it is nonrandom and a random balance. lol
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I've had worse; ha-ha! The non-random force is what holds all of us through one force; we split, now we seek out and find from within. I suppose one could say it is an infinite journey; I say it is infinite opportunities...... Then again, I could always have some lame-ass, show up with a bible or a science book and prove me wrong... Ha-ha!
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
I can't believe I didn't write this earlier. To all of those that said that you have to know it's designer or it's predictions are wrong. This would be if it was already "designed" , not if it is an on going "design". I don't recall saying that it was already "designed", I said it has "design".

You lose Atheists.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, we shall, once again, engulf our own existence once more, while awaiting the next collapse to start this thing over "one more again"... It's all funny though, isn't it? LOL!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes! The most stimulating thread I have stayed on that I can remember. I have learned a lot while on this thread from atheist, religionists, nothingtists. It has been enjoyable.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  While you're busy with all this "name calling"...give me a title while yer at it...
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol, I had a feeling for some reason that you would ask that after that post.
  I would say nothingist because you seem or try to keep an unbiased opinion, even when you start leaning to one side.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Here I was, all this time, thinking I was something... I already know the answer, as I am what I say I am, just like the name I gave myself for this little, devilish, crafty hub site. LOL!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol Nothingist, I was meaning that you don't have a belief or non belief title. Thats what I thought, I may be wrong. Do you have a belief/nonbelief title?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I believe I'm atomically attached to this universe; how's that?
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That is not a belief title. lol But...belief titles are overrated anyways. The titles are half of the battles. Lots of bad history in titles.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  How is it not? I've just provided universal acceptance; how can anyone argue with that?
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol That was a sentence, how can a title be a sentence?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Huh? It's all the same, right?
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I don't know. I thought a title is shorter than a sentence. Maybe you are the title pioneer being the first to have a sentence for a belief title. lol
  report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Okay, title says: Life is Universal, but yet, Random! Ha-ha!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The first title that contradicted itself, created balance, and was a sentence. lol
  report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Contradictory life of nothingness that is actually something? Ha-ha-ha-ha!
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  My dear Obscure really wants a label. nothingists are all possibilitists and infinitists. so i think the fitting label is you're a Zero.
  
  well, depending on how you look at it, that is both an insult and a compliment. such is the nature of a zero.
  report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No, Cecilia: In your original reply you mentioned how me & Mr. Marine must be on drugs and/or taking something. You, as usual, totally changed your response - so I can't prove it now.
  I don't need a title, but thanks for assuming wrong, as usual. Names & titles is actually what is wrong with a lot of things on this planet.
  Zero? Ha-ha-ha!
  report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Obscurely Diverse: Contradictory life of nothingness that is actually something? Ha-ha-ha-ha!

lol Maybe, it would seem to be a balance.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Is this a universal equation of some sorts? Maybe 'Cecilia' will come back and see us, and give us some psycho-babble-bull-sh*t that will balance our pre-existing balance, perhaps? Ha-ha! LOL!
  PS. Speaking of balance, I've got to get off here for a while because I've got to go to work tonight... Fun-fun...
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  you already provide your own "psycho" babble.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ...to combat your baloney with baloney! Woo-woo!
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  *yawn*
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, I've finally reached that point as well: *yawn*
  
  I should've stuck to hubs, websites, and blogs instead of acting silly on forums......at least there is money involved there. LOL!
  Have fun people, and good luck with solving the mysteries of the universe...or whatever floats your boat.
  reply report
60
Merlin Fraserposted 14 years ago
In reply to the original question; "Is Evolution an Intellegent or Ignorant design?"

I think the answer has to be neither. Evolution is not a process of concious thought it is an act of natural selection; in nature if something cannot adapt to change then it will die.

I suppose it could be argued that with the current evolution of mankind he may think he can over rule and overcome natural selection but he is wrong and we will all ulimately pay the price for his folly.
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hello Merlin, how can you be so sure natural selection isn't conscious selection? If not conscious on how to adapt, it dies. The higher consciousness it evolves with, maybe the higher chance the life has to survive.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
If natural selection has no conscious or design, it seems like Darwin would have called it named it random selection instead of natural selection. But it is not random, traits are passed on from previous generations. I think it could be conscious selection.
reply report
60
Merlin Fraserposted 14 years ago
Darwin was not only famous for his theories of evolution and the survival of species by natural selection he was also a great observer.
One of his studies here in the UK was moths. Among one of the fairly common species he noticed that its wing colour and pattern gave it perfect camouflage when it rested on certain tree trunks and in certain light it became virtually invisible to the eye.
At the same time; with the Industrial Revolution in full swing our towns and cities were filthy places with huge factory chimneys belching out black smoke and soot particles. Everything was coated in this grim. So much so that any moth that wandered into town stood out like a beacon on everything it settled on.
As he looked closer Darwin found other moths within the towns and cities with similar wing patterns but the markings, also similar were much darker. First he thought he had found a new species of moth but he hadn’t. The moth had simply adapted to survive in its chosen environment.
There are hundreds of other examples if you care to look around; birds and animals that have merely adapted to their surroundings or habitat. In that the only intelligence I see is a natural inbuilt desire to survive.
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I understand there are many examples of evolution, thats why I believe evolution, just not by the book. How could any life adapt without consciously adapting? Desire is also uses consciousness. When adapting, some traits are adapted for the animal to survive predators. Now my main question.
  
  Without an animal being conscious of it's surrounding threats, what would make that animal evolve and adapt to survive?
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
This may be my favorite question I have asked so far. Have fun.

How does something respond to a threat without being conscious of the threat?
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think a lot of people have trouble correlating evolution with consciousness or awareness, so, good luck with your query...
  reply report
2. 93
  Susana Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  It's quite simple animals are driven by the need to eat, drink and procreate. If it's a bit cold because of increasing ice for example, the animal will move on to find food. If they are looking for a mate they'll do the same. They are responding to a threat, but only guided by their need to eat/drink/procreate, not consciousness.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, but I think Mr. Marine is implying a deeper meaning behind it. I know it seems simple when viewing it from a shallow scientific realm or common view towards these questions - that he is asking, but he is digging deeper into matters that are not found in religions or science books......
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Susana, if it was simple, we would know all the answers. We know little to nothing, even collectively. But, it doesn't mean it's pointless or that it can't or won't be figured out. Plus, it is stimulating and fun.
  This need you are talking about can't exist without the subconscious or conscious. What else but conscious could consciously react to needs? I think a lot of things can be ruled in by what can be ruled out. I can't think of any answers where life could evolve without consciousness.
  
  Hello Obscure, you are right, there are no thoughts like the individual thoughts.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Susanna, your argument is on the side of cellular automata.
  
  Fact is the cells you speak of learns from the level of the membrane. The membrane is its brain. it responds to changes in the outside soup itswam in before it even learned to eat and procreate. So at this level you can argue that consciousness to respond to environment is already present as reflex. Why did it form reflex to begin with?
  
  the answer is to stay alive, why does it want to stay alive? big big question. why do we want to stay alive? a non-living thing does not have reflex to something that it will reorganize its composition. it just sits there, it doesn't want to preserve itself because it is not aware that there is something to observe. Cell membranes are aware that certain things will be the cause of its demise, that's why it moves away from the stimuli. then it organized to increase its awareness to whatever stimuli will preserve its life or end it, leading to our complex brain.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
I think Darwin left a few things out.
reply report
1. 60
  Merlin Fraserposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think you're right; nobody ever said Darwin had all the answers; we still don't .
  What Darwin did, like Copernicus ,Da Vinci and Newton, was to advance our knowledge and invite others, like us, to challenge him and take his thoughts forward.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  True; it is just a compilation of knowledge via our ongoing awareness due to the consciousness of our own existence. Making headway with prior knowledge, as opposed to degenerative acts of faith, is always a good thing...
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Merlin, I agree, even the best minds in the world know or knew little to nothing of how their minds came to be. Everyone today has an advantage over everyone that has died in the past for collective information that is always evolving.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  we are actually way past darwin at this stage. we are already above fossil study and into genomics.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And neuroscience.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
2. 54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Of course, you wouldn't know that since you never read any of his work.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I know more than his work. How long has he been dead now?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  which one have you read Q? all of darwin's work? please give us a title. have you read anything after darwin's origin of the species?
  reply report
60
qwarkposted 14 years ago
This is a "no brainer" question!
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Please enlighten the crowd; hell, after entertaining the notion, I've become brain damaged in the process... Ha-ha!
  reply report
2. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Although, I must add: his original query no longer applies...
  reply report
93
Susana Sposted 14 years ago
Then maybe the question is, "Does consciousness evolve?"
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Infinite evolution of consciousness? Hmm, sounds like fun.
  reply report
2. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Susana, I think the answer is yes! Our consciousness evolved from previous consciousness. I think we are highly consciously evolved over all other life on the planet. I think consciousness is always evolving.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  yes it does, even in our own lifetime. but even anatomically you will see that our capacity to understand things has prompted evolution to generate a brain that progressively become able to see self as 1. just the individual that needs to survive 2. just family that needs to co-exist to survive better 3 just tribe, friends that need to co-exist and survive even better than the family unit4 all life that are interdependent for survival.
  
  the brain anatomy upgrades happen after the breakthrough is made, meaning. the parent organism will make a breakthrough before the offspring will have it in his anatomy as an actual visible organ we can dissect and zap with electrodes.
  
  why else would our brain be plastic within our own lifetime? because within our lifetime, things happen that calls for changes in adaptation to live and not just to live to be alive with ever increasing well-being.
  reply report
3. 85
  Jewelsposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Does conscious evolve? Sure, it broadens in line with our expanded awareness.
  
  What makes one person want to expand their consciousness and another not give two hoots is a matter of interest. The contest of brain and brawn could then come into play as to whether a more intelligent and aware person can win over a muscled human who's main agenda is survival of it's gene pool.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Jewels, consciousness is still not absolutely defined. Maybe it is simply a matter of the ones that seem less conscious simply don't understand consciousness and how to raise their consciousness. Maybe also they don't understand the importance and amazing capabilities of higher consciousness. I think awareness would win over muscle since awareness defined the muscle.
  reply report
  93
  Susana Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  I can see consciousness evolving in one lifetime, but the question is does it evolve over generations in both humans and animals in a similar way to physical evolution?
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think absolutely. If not, I don't think every animal and plants would show signs of consciousness the same as us. Another question would be why we are a higher consciousness than plants and animals that have been around far longer than us when we evolved from them.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Darwin says natural selection can only work for the good of the being.

How can it only work for the good of the being if it's not conscious selection?
reply report
1. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  it presupposes that it knows what's good for it.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "knows" being the operative word.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sounds pretty "nifty" to me.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  u-huh.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
So on the basis evolution is conscious design, how did the conscious come to be?

Did consciousness design consciousness?
reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
I think consciousness does design consciousness. Could something unconscious design conscious beings? Not logical to me.
reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
I think it is interesting that the dino's were wiped out before we came along. Was this really random or could this have been "nonrandom"? Possibly the dino's were wiped out by design so a higher conscious life/us could evolve. If dino's wouldn't have been killed, would we be here today?
reply report
1. 0
  china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Popped into my head the thought of god sitting up there scratching his head thinking, "s**t killed the wrong species again !"
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Seriously, you don't think it's odd that the lower consciousness got destroyed so the higher consciousness could evolve?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  wow, that's a thought that will germinate.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Welcome to my madness.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  it is not madness from where I'm sitting. If you see that every ice age, the stuff that emerge out of them is more complex than what it killed off, was it killed or was it upgraded...since the genetic relationship was there. I say it was upgraded. the genes survived, hence...its still alive.
  
  coffee, tea? with the mad hatter and me? if you think of it cecilia is ailicec read backwards.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Reflective thoughts?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  oh yeah, it upgraded itself, that's even more interesting.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Intuition versus acquired knowledge through text books, is even more interesting.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  what you call intuition is prediction based on prior knowledge, fact is the more you know the more intuitive you are.
  
  even inborn intuition is knowledge acquired from unconscious knowledge inherited from parents through the genes. All we are about is acquiring knowledge, that is why our brains have the facility for a table-napkin sized brain scrunched in our head for memory.
  
  for instance i can predict with pretty good accuracy diseases based on facial features...intuition? yes! psychic. no. knowledge? yes. when you know more, you can predict more connections with increasing accuracy.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What I call intuition is: quick & ready insight; the power of knowing things without conscious reasoning...... It is more interesting than acquired knowledge through textbooks.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think it is pretty interesting when drawing conclusions based on little or partial information, then researching coming to learn that the first assumptive conclusions were correct.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I know what you mean. like for instance the entire premise that BLINK by malcolm gladwel is based on.
  
  I apologize to those who are offended by the book and source citing (as in Obscure). I need to do this because there are some people in this thread who will pick on details (to the detriment of the discussion) as thoroughly as they pick their nose.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well, it still has to grow into the world as fact. All knowledge was guided into actualization by BIG IDEAS. It is part of the process of understanding. It is fundamental the way all matter exists because of the presence of energy
  
  (which is actually nothing more than the movement of something which is actually nothing-- from point A to point B, from + to - to + to -,
  from presence to absence to presence to absence,
  
  like in the case of the binary system, 1s and 0s that enables all information in the internet to be stored and transferred. presence of light,
  
  absence of light alternating in varying degrees of regularity)
  
  Ideas in the brain are born from the connection of a negative conduit(dendrite) and a positive conduit (axon) of electrochemicals (charged fluid) between a synaptic gap. from + to -. this phenomenon results in a spark, a synaptic flash.
  
  which is essentially the energy dynamics of what generates an actual spark in a light bulb: - wire and + wire from electrolyte (charged water)
  
  So at this level, you begin to wonder if a spark is actually a signal of consciousness. If you think about it perhaps we see it as light and experience it as knowing. (or more precisely if energy is in fact a manifestation of consciousness in the most rudimentary sense...meaning conscious enough to will movement towards a direction)
  
  It is like the way we experience space as time. (meaning to experience 12 feet, we spend around 1 minute walking it)
  
  Many many interesting angles on this one marine. all from science yet all meaningless if you fail to string it together.
  
  Again I apologize for all the science, obscure, but it just plants marine's ideas firmly on relatively more solid ground and reduces unnecessary wise-cracking that distracts from its value. (case in point, one below)
  
  It furthers the premise that consciousness is fundamental in evolution-- whether in a cosmic or earthly sense.
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where?
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Come again? Explain that, please.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Blink by Malcolm Gladwell.
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Another woo-woo?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  To you, yes. To the rest of the world a very reliable source and 3 time best-selling author.
  report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ha! "the rest of the world" Hilarious.
  
  Best selling authors are not reliable sources of reality, just ask Stephen King.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  my dear, you are seriously in denial.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  again the illusion of better obscure. each one is a stage in hierarchy of knowing that is founded upon each other in alternating regularity.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks cecilia. I think an abiogenesis theory that is interesting is that life could have arrived on comets, asteroids, or meteorites. If this is true, it offers even more madness. lol
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think this is very possible. I think it would explain some errors and imperfections in evolution. It does make more sense to me than consciousness from nothing.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  it is a fact that most of the earth's water came from space from ice rich meteors. if you've seen cosmic collisions at the Hayden Sphere in New York, the vision is like spermatozoa seeding an ovum!
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Since when?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  well if you're going to be precise about it, it is a theory with a lot of evidence and is considered the most probable source of life otherwise they wouldn't be showing it in THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM.
  
  http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2 … ths-oceans
  
  http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/06 … index.html
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ah yes, popsci and cnn are your sources, I should have guessed.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  yes, because it is old news. that is how old it is, and yet you are still questioning it.
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry, but I don't get my info from popsci or cnn when it comes to the observable world and how it works.
  
  You do, evidently.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  where is the information you speak of? you're just harping on old things and heckling.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  relativity in a large scale was just proven this year, Q. Big Bang is also still a theory with a lot of evidence. Evolution is still a theory.
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for not backing up your claim and deferring to other topics. Well done.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  what did I not back up? I already stated my source: COSMIC COLLISIONS, Rose Center for earth and space. I can also state other sources but then that would be overkill when museums are already saying it.
  reply report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry, but the vast majority of water on the earth came from the earth, not from meteors and comets.
  
  Cosmic Collisions is a show narrated by Robert Redford and does not claim that all the water came from meteors and comets. Please stop woo-wooing this place to death.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  most of the water came from meteors, the script does claim that. the earth was hot, very hot it could not hold water.
  You want a serious source, here buy it:
  
  Volatile accretion history of the terrestrial planets and dynamic implications. Francis Albarede. Nature Journal. 29 October 2009.
  report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry, but that assertion doesn't fly and never did. You are embracing woo-wooism.
  report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  you offer no sources other than yourself and then you imply you have better sources without proof.
  report
  54
  (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's hilarious. You offer a tv show and popsci magazine as your sources and expect us to believe you.
  
  What you fail to understand is the fact that water had to originate somewhere, it didn't just appear out of thin air, magically.
  
  Just like the assertion of panspermia, life had to originate somewhere.
  
  You also fail to understand that the water found on other planets does not have the same atomic structure as water on earth.
  report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Is consciousness ignorant or intelligent design?
reply report
71
earnestshubposted 14 years ago
Check this out marine. May help answer a lot of questions about evolution. Facts.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Unintelligent-D … -Evolution
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Earnest, it was a good hub, but I have already read everything written in it. I think vestigial traits clearly show imperfections in evolution while also showing design. For me to rule out intelligent design, I would also have to rule out the intelligence of consciousness. Vestigial traits do not weigh out consciousness to me.
  reply report
2. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for sharing Earnest, but that too needs updating.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Are cells conscious?

How can unconscious cells come together to create the conscious without having a level of consciousness?
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The cells in our body, for example, are conscious through our own awareness of consciousness of "self"... One could say the cells unified to form us, and we formed, but what if our theory of unification is more of a fabrication from something else? What fabricated everything else? The question is: What makes life? Since you asked, what is unconscious cells? What kind of dissecting question is that, by the way?
  On a side note: I think people spend too much time looking outward; it's the same pattern forward or backwards, inside or out. So why not go with the closest to the core you can possibly get, and that being, from within your own self......
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hello there. If we didn't have awareness, we would still be conscious. I think awareness and consciousness get mixed so often because there is no absolute definition and most have their own difinitions. I don't understand how cells that build consciousness can be called unconscious. I think what makes life is what life is dependent on. Life is dependent on consciousness to survive. I am looking to myself for the questions and answers, you even get closer to self when you see others outside perspective on yourself.
  On awareness and consciousness, I lean toward the philosophical definition of awareness being aware of consciousness. An animal can be conscious, but likely not aware of it's consciousness. They can and have also been used the same. If an animal is conscious of a threat, the animal is aware of the threat.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Good morning, Mr. Marine of Madness...
  
  I agree, that the terms 'awareness' and 'consciousness' are almost interchangeable at times.
  On my last reply, I started to change my first sentence after I wrote it, but I decided that it at least sounded good - so I left it.
  Yep, I don't know or understand how cells could be unconscious.
  When I mentioned about spending too much time looking outward, I was talking about something else; it didn't involve people; it was more science related.
  I also understand what you mean by looking at others in response to yourself, to help get closer to 'self'. Of course, depending on your intentions, this doesn't always apply.
  It is sort of like the philosophy of reflection, as in: Relationship is understanding; it is a process of self-revelation; relationship is the mirror in which you discover yourself...
  
  Anyway, since I was conscious and semi-aware this morning, I thought I'd add another comment to this ongoing forum of madness... LOL!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Good morning. Excellent thoughts, they work good in the mornings.
  I agree with your comments. If intentions are to observe others to be like others it is impossible to be individual, if intentions are to observe others to understand how others view you, this gives greater perspective into self. I also agree, relationships are a great example.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Even Knowles admits that plants are aware and conscious. How can a plant be aware or conscious without the cells having consciousness?
reply report
1. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  we evolved from plant life. it's true.
  
  i now see the problem of this debate. It rests on fundamental questions that remain outside of scientific consensus. There is no set brain theory (one is being developed and it based on the premise that intelligence is a predictive system independent of behavior, meaning that you can be intelligent even when you are not moving, the act of prediction is enough) and what is alive. We can talk and talk and talk butif these definitions do not reach fact status, we are just having a tea party in wonderland with a couple of cheshire cats.
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree that all life is both aware and conscious, however, I don't think all life is aware of their consciousness.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  well, proof is in their brains, which makes me wonder what a dolphin is thinking while its snapping away on tuna. They do have a larger more complex brain than us.
  
  (for those who are in doubt, visit natural history museum, origin of the species section, middle part of the room)
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Do you know the science or any theories explaining why we are further evolved or more complex compared to animals that have been around twice as long as us?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not trying to be silly, but what if we were designed by another race of advanced beings, possibly used as slaves back before our Homo erectus days, that has vanished from this planet long ago? Of course, we would still evolve through consciousness...
  Either way, with our creators getting the hell out of here and no proof or evidence left, it would still make for a great Sci-Fi flick! LOL!
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  read much Zechariah Sitchin, have we? (or maybe you're just plugged to the mainframe Matrix style)
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Who's that?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  He's the author of Chariot of the Gods. his premise is what you just said. He actually has a following and several books published that are still in print today. He is not taken seriously of course because he is saying aliens made the homo sapiens from interbreeding with upright apes. He called them the Annunaki.
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I have read his books, and as you say, he is not taken seriously now.
  
  Mind you the Annunaki story has more tablets than any other ancient belief. Some of the aerial shots of spaceship landing spots and other strange formations are still not explained away.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I know earnest! it is interesting to say the least,but there is enough functional mysteries to wrap my brain around.
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Wow! I never heard of it; just using my own imagination. I must have applied some of that intuition of mine again, LOL! Ahh, either way, like I said before, it would still make for a great sci-fi flick. Does anyone know if they ever made a movie about this concept?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  there was a documentary movie about it....lots of cults came after...funny.
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Why we further evolved Marine? There is a book that I would like to recommend. It's the Mating Mind, Geoffrey Miller published at 2000. His idea is that the things we hold dear like art, philosophy, wit and large reproductive organs all evolved to improve mating chances. We have evolved high level mating proficiency, as in we are probably worse than rabbits that we are at it all times of the year. we don't have mating seasons.
  
  In other words, we learned to make more love and less war than our animal counterparts.
  
  He concluded that we are works in progress and we will branch out to newer more advanced species...last year. discovery magazine confirmed that current genetic studies is in agreement with this theory, it looks like he was right. The human races are evolving away from each other into newer daughter species that will vary in proficiency.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
I think clean cut proof that consciousness drives evolution is that plants and animals evolve traits out of consciousness of the environment. If animals and plants weren't conscious of threats to survival, there wouldn't be evolution of defense and survival mechanisms. I think it is pretty interesting that consciousness can design physical characteristics.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This also applies to sexuality and beauty; look at the changes of mankind down through history...
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If consciousness builds our evolution, is it really a stretch to think consciousness could build the universe seeing as how it is capable to build the physical?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Is it just me, or did we accidentally, inadvertently & haphazardly create a new religion of some sorts - through consciousness? Ha-ha!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol I don't know, maybe. I am still amazed and trying to get my mind around the fact that the consciousness builds physical aspects of the body in us and all other life. I think it is pretty amazing.
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
The unconscious critics have been silenced.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It seems that they have become mute... LOL!
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Alright, lets start a new chapter and build. What made the first cell or organism conscious? If we say a synapse is consciousness, we are saying there wasn't consciousness before the synapse.
reply report
1. 60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I thought we all started as two giant balls of consciousness, as the metaphorical eyelids raised upon this wicked dualism of yin & yang, light & darkness, love & hate, we clashed and BOOM-BANG, we have been seeking for our union ever since? Ha-ha-ha! LOL! Okay, I need to retire for the day...
  Keep the madness going, Mr. Marine!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  lol That is as possible as any other explanation right now. Do you think it began with one consciousness or multiple? Could an unconscious universe create conscious life?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Answer #1) TWO!
  Answer #2) NO!
  
  But then again, what the hell do I know? LOL!
  reply report
  60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Why would it take two and what can be shown to prove that the universe is conscious and has reasoning?
  reply report
  60
  Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I was just making a joke, that time.
  But, in a way, it would sort of balance.
  As for proving the universe is conscious and has reasoning, I'll let you get started on that one - I'm running out of time tonight.
  reply report
71
earnestshubposted 14 years ago
the Annunaki.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpN_KD7b0NQ
reply report
1. 67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ha ha, interesting...
  reply report
  71
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ceciliabeltran, I did not know what to believe about this. Do you have some knowledge on the subject I could gain from?
  reply report
  67
  ceciliabeltranposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hi earnest. Unfortunately no. But I have an applied physicist friend who keeps on hounding me to read it. He says that the only reason Zechariah Sitchin is not taken seriously is nobody else has as much knowledge on the subject as he does. But his data, according to him checks out. its his conclusions that people want to stay away from.
  
  Google DOGON tribe. they claim that the dolphin like aliens taught them all they knew about farming.
  reply report
  60
  Obscure Divineposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, just like the aliens 'taught' the Homo erectus to build fire! Or did Zeus strike upon that ass? Hell, if we had the ability for interstellar travel and showed up at some random planet that was at the beginning, primitive stages of awareness, we could show up with a simple flashlight and a hand-held communicating device, and you can bet they would be writing in their tablets about "us" gods (Earth people) and how "mighty" we were. It makes ya wonder, doesn't it? It is all about different levels of awareness or is it not? LOL!
  reply report
60
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
Just to add for those that don't think evolution is an intelligent design, do you at least admit to evolution giving the possibility of intelligence?
reply report
0
EnglishMposted 14 years ago
Good question. Evolution is of intelligent design. Ignorance is of human design.
reply report
1. 60
  marinealways24posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree.
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 2 3 4

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies