Total Posts:61|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Plot Hole Of Evolution

Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2016 2:21:29 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Fruits evolved to be tasty to animals so that the seeds have a better chance of survival. Seeds have a thick coating allowing them to pass through an animal's digestive tract. An animal eats the fruit (seeds included), wanders away, and poops out the seeds. The animal's dung acts like a natural fertilizer so that the seed can grow away from its parent tree.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2016 3:29:53 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
the world is the work of a creator.

I will start with your biggest misunderstanding first. We can accurately say that modern fruits and their flavors are the work of a creator. That creator is us (humans) through selective breeding. Should you be shown and taste the original form of most fruits we have today you would not recognize them.

For example, a peach some 5000 years ago look very similar to a cherry and was not very sweet. The original melon had a bitter taste and was the size of a about 2 inches in diameter. It was mostly seeds (which were edible and contained far like nuts). You can still find many of the wild examples of some fruits: wild bananas have very large seeds and you have to pick the meat out from around them. Wild strawberries are small and almost flavorless.

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

The primary nutritional compounds in fruit are sugars (primarily fructose). In its pure form, fructose (or other sugars) all taste the same. The variety in flavors is primarily due to non-nutritional chemical composition of the fruits. These non-nutritional compositions for flavor and the high levels of sugars in fruits is primarily due to human intervention as described above.

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

Animal's taste is primarily based on nutritional content and not some ideal flavor preference. Plants evolved the ability to produce sugar (photosynthesis) because it is a simple chemical reaction that allows them to store energy. As lifeforms developed that could not produce their own sugar for energy they evolved the ability to taste things like sugar to give us a gauge of how nutritious a food might be (also how safe a food might be).

So plants did not evolve to have a flavor. They began producing sugar because it gave them an advantages over plants that could not store energy. Animals developed the ability to taste sugar because it gave them the advantage in finding nutritious food sources.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2016 10:56:28 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?
Animals can adapt to the plants available, and plants can adapt to the animals available, so each shapes the other.

For example, early bees were actually wasps [https://en.wikipedia.org...], and were carnivorous, so they had little to do with plants directly (except that their prey might be found in and on plants.) Some plants -- like almonds, apples, pears and cherries -- now depend almost exclusively on bees for pollination, while bees now depend exclusively on plants for food.

How did that happen?

It's conjectured that wasp larvae feeding on prey brought by their parents may have 'learned' to eat pollen on the bodies of their prey. Thus pollen became an additional source of food, and then eventually a primary source of food -- perhaps as wasps found new ranges, or the sources of prey changed.

Can the same happen with fruits?

Of course... Animals can adapt to the fruits available when preferred food sources aren't around, and plants can adapt to the animals available in consequence of animals preferring the smell or taste of some fruits over others, and hence spreading their seeds further. Later it may look as if certain plants and animals were 'made' for one another, when the harsher reality is that those which could exploit one another thrived together, while those which couldn't, died alone.
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

So the animals evolving liking a particular flavor came first.

You "plot hole" has more holes than swiss cheese.
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 6:44:24 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 2:21:29 PM, roun12 wrote:
Fruits evolved to be tasty to animals so that the seeds have a better chance of survival.

What of yucky and poisonous fruits? They evolved so animals wouldn't eat them, allowing them to reproduce without animal interference. And, what about out simply flavorless fruits?

No matter what you can hypothetically find in the field, you have an Evolutionary explanation that you invoke without one shred of evidence. In other words, Evolution explains nothing, because it explains everything.
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:44:24 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:21:29 PM, roun12 wrote:
Fruits evolved to be tasty to animals so that the seeds have a better chance of survival.

What of yucky and poisonous fruits? They evolved so animals wouldn't eat them, allowing them to reproduce without animal interference. And, what about out simply flavorless fruits?

No matter what you can hypothetically find in the field, you have an Evolutionary explanation that you invoke without one shred of evidence. In other words, Evolution explains nothing, because it explains everything.

You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

So the conclusion we are left with is that fruit and taste neither proves nor disproves evolution.
Aran55633
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:06:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:44:24 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:21:29 PM, roun12 wrote:
Fruits evolved to be tasty to animals so that the seeds have a better chance of survival.

What of yucky and poisonous fruits? They evolved so animals wouldn't eat them, allowing them to reproduce without animal interference. And, what about out simply flavorless fruits?

No matter what you can hypothetically find in the field, you have an Evolutionary explanation that you invoke without one shred of evidence. In other words, Evolution explains nothing, because it explains everything.

The point is that this isn't a reductio ad absurdum, which is the point that Riwaaz was attempting to establish. We can reconcile this concept with the theory of evolution through the use of this plausible explanation.

It's cute to see a creationist, of all people, accuse scientists of devising an explanation "without one shred of evidence."
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy. Most animals don't even eat plants that try to be yummy, they eat grass and leaves.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 11:33:33 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Explanations, like lies, need other explanations or lies to keep them in the comment market.

In this discussion we have animals eating fruit, nuts and etc, which they have developed a taste for, as well as them being a necessary diet.

Now, does evolution have that very clever "creation trick" of evolving plants and fruits of various kinds, trees for birds and apes to live in, nuts and berries for the bears, underground roots and yams for the moles, flowers with suitable pollen for the pollinators , and have evolved a healthy, life sustaining habitat before the first animals is on the earth?

What if the first animal to appear, even if the habitat was there, bit into a fruit, and said "Yuck" and died of starvation?

Remember in all this, you evolutionists are talking about millions of years to evolve all this magical garden and its animal inhabitants. How would "Evolution Random Process" of animals know what would be nice to eat before those animals ever evolved?

Don't you think to create an environment where all life could live and be fully and healthily maintained before the animal appears is a bit much to ask of a chance evolutionary event? Come on People, be serious!!!!!

Would we expect those great foliage gulping dinosaurs to be delicately picking a cherry sized peach and going "Yum Yum, I only need another hundred pound or so of these for lunch?

It is no wonder that many humans believe in a creator, when we have the extraordinary acceptance that all the things happened by chance.

When is anyone going to explain "instinct" to me, as an evolutionary process.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:57:17 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

Sugar always tasted like sugar.

Flavors are not just different concentrations of sugar, there are pleasant smells, aromas and taste is very different too.

So the animals evolving liking a particular flavor came first.

How?
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself. You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous. That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:05:57 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 4:57:17 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

Sugar always tasted like sugar.

Flavors are not just different concentrations of sugar, there are pleasant smells, aromas and taste is very different too.

Our taste bugs and smell bugs can respond to many different types of food not just sugar. They also react to meat.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:31:19 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 3:29:53 PM, Floid wrote:
the world is the work of a creator.

I will start with your biggest misunderstanding first. We can accurately say that modern fruits and their flavors are the work of a creator. That creator is us (humans) through selective breeding. Should you be shown and taste the original form of most fruits we have today you would not recognize them.

For example, a peach some 5000 years ago look very similar to a cherry and was not very sweet. The original melon had a bitter taste and was the size of a about 2 inches in diameter. It was mostly seeds (which were edible and contained far like nuts). You can still find many of the wild examples of some fruits: wild bananas have very large seeds and you have to pick the meat out from around them. Wild strawberries are small and almost flavorless.

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

The primary nutritional compounds in fruit are sugars (primarily fructose). In its pure form, fructose (or other sugars) all taste the same. The variety in flavors is primarily due to non-nutritional chemical composition of the fruits. These non-nutritional compositions for flavor and the high levels of sugars in fruits is primarily due to human intervention as described above.

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

Animal's taste is primarily based on nutritional content and not some ideal flavor preference.

Why does a certain configuration of nutrients tastes so good?

Plants evolved the ability to produce sugar (photosynthesis) because it is a simple chemical reaction that allows them to store energy.

and they were smart enough to figure that out ? L O L

There is no purposeful evolution. How come that many plants evolved this ability by random mutations? Damn.

As lifeforms developed that could not produce their own sugar for energy they evolved the ability to taste things like sugar to give us a gauge of how nutritious a food might be (also how safe a food might be).

SOME SWEET THINGS TASTE SO DIFFERENT THAN SUGAR.

In fact, sugar has its own flavor too, it's only one of those 'so many flavors'.

Lemon does not taste sweet despite having higher content of sugar compared to strawberries.

So plants did not evolve to have a flavor. They began producing sugar because it gave them an advantages over plants that could not store energy.

Again, purposeful evolution doesn't exist.. That's what atheists nay evolutionists told me.

Animals developed the ability to taste sugar because it gave them the advantage in finding nutritious food sources.

Magic.. Are you saying taste is not real? You mean our brain is manipulated to like a particular taste ?
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:39:16 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself.

Hey, I am not an animal.

You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

I don't eat non veg.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Yes and what you've wrote below seconds my opinion.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous.

Why didn't poisonous food evolved to taste good?

That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

Oh and don't even talk about senses. If sense / consciousness is just a bunch of chemical reactions, carry them out in a glass tube. Make glass a living being.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:46:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:05:57 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:17 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

Sugar always tasted like sugar.

Flavors are not just different concentrations of sugar, there are pleasant smells, aromas and taste is very different too.

Our taste bugs and smell bugs can respond to many different types of food not just sugar. They also react to meat.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat? Those organisms with a lack of taste detection for meat and those relying on an exclusively vegetarian diet are not any less probable to get through natural selection.

A random thing happening in all does not qualify to be called 'random'.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
janesix
Posts: 3,466
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:47:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Thats easy. Plants evolved the ability to make sugars for their own energy source, billions of years before there were animals to eat them. Does that answer your question?
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:48:16 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:39:16 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself.

Hey, I am not an animal.

I didn't call you one.

You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

I don't eat non veg.

You don't but many people do.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Yes and what you've wrote below seconds my opinion.

How exactly? I am confused. Do you understand why taste exists? Do you understand how natural selection works?

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous.

Why didn't poisonous food evolved to taste good?

Because some plants are poisonous to keep from getting eaten. Why would they want to be eaten?

That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

Oh and don't even talk about senses. If sense / consciousness is just a bunch of chemical reactions, carry them out in a glass tube. Make glass a living being.

I really don't understand what consciousness is. I have no way of forming life from glass so I can't help you there.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:48:30 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself. You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous. That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat? Those organisms with a lack of taste detection for meat and those relying on an exclusively vegetarian diet are not any less probable to get through natural selection.

Where are those animals?

A random thing happening in all does not qualify to be called 'random'.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:55:26 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:46:43 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 5:05:57 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:17 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

Sugar always tasted like sugar.

Flavors are not just different concentrations of sugar, there are pleasant smells, aromas and taste is very different too.

Our taste bugs and smell bugs can respond to many different types of food not just sugar. They also react to meat.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat?

Yes they do. Their taste bugs make meat taste unappetizing to them which is why they don't try to eat it when they have the chance.

Those organisms with a lack of taste detection for meat and those relying on an exclusively vegetarian diet are not any less probable to get through natural selection.

Plant eating animals have bodies for processing plants not meat so those with taste buds that tell them plants are good tend to be better at surviving. So it seems reasonable that natural selection would select plant eating animals with taste buds telling them that plants taste good.
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 5:58:23 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:48:30 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself. You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous. That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat?

Meat has a lot of energy but the only problem is that it can be hard to catch. So there are pros and cons to being a carnivore and pros and cons to being a herbivore.

Herbivores have bodies built for processing plants so even though meat has a lot of energy it is just not very useful for them. That is why they don't have taste buds telling them meat tastes good.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 6:27:45 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:47:07 AM, janesix wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Thats easy. Plants evolved the ability to make sugars for their own energy source, billions of years before there were animals to eat them. Does that answer your question?

You answer contradicts other evolutionists here.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 6:28:23 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:47:07 AM, janesix wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Thats easy. Plants evolved the ability to make sugars for their own energy source, billions of years before there were animals to eat them. Does that answer your question?

Your answer contradicts other evolutionists..
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 6:34:10 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 5:58:23 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 5:48:30 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself. You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous. That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat?

Meat has a lot of energy but the only problem is that it can be hard to catch. So there are pros and cons to being a carnivore and pros and cons to being a herbivore.

Herbivores have bodies built for processing plants so even though meat has a lot of energy it is just not very useful for them. That is why they don't have taste buds telling them meat tastes good.

Do not de rail this thread. You said animals evolved to like the taste of sugar, OK, why did fruits evolve to taste different than sugar?
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
VelCrow
Posts: 1,273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 6:48:12 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 11:33:33 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
Explanations, like lies, need other explanations or lies to keep them in the comment market.

In this discussion we have animals eating fruit, nuts and etc, which they have developed a taste for, as well as them being a necessary diet.

Now, does evolution have that very clever "creation trick" of evolving plants and fruits of various kinds, trees for birds and apes to live in, nuts and berries for the bears, underground roots and yams for the moles, flowers with suitable pollen for the pollinators , and have evolved a healthy, life sustaining habitat before the first animals is on the earth?

What if the first animal to appear, even if the habitat was there, bit into a fruit, and said "Yuck" and died of starvation?

Remember in all this, you evolutionists are talking about millions of years to evolve all this magical garden and its animal inhabitants. How would "Evolution Random Process" of animals know what would be nice to eat before those animals ever evolved?

Don't you think to create an environment where all life could live and be fully and healthily maintained before the animal appears is a bit much to ask of a chance evolutionary event? Come on People, be serious!!!!!

Would we expect those great foliage gulping dinosaurs to be delicately picking a cherry sized peach and going "Yum Yum, I only need another hundred pound or so of these for lunch?

It is no wonder that many humans believe in a creator, when we have the extraordinary acceptance that all the things happened by chance.

When is anyone going to explain "instinct" to me, as an evolutionary process.

Let me give you an example. Suppose there are 100 animals (lets call them X) living with plants that gives fruit (lets call the fruits Y). in the beginning, half of X like eating Y and half of X didnt like eating Y. Those that did not like eating Y had nothing else to eat and thus eventually dies of starvation. On the other hand, those X that like eating Y, had abundance of food and did not die of starvation and are more likely to pass their genes to the next generation of X. Eventually, you will find that the majority of population of X that still survives will like eating Y.

Now is that simple enough for you to understand? Can you find any faults with this explanation?
"Ah....So when god "Taught you" online, did he have a user name like "Darthmaulrules1337", and did he talk in all caps?" ~ Axonly

http://www.debate.org...
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 7:02:00 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 6:34:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 5:58:23 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 5:48:30 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:57:48 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/28/2016 4:44:10 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:26:14 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/27/2016 10:09:29 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:53:52 PM, distraff wrote:
You misunderstand. The OP was trying to disprove evolution. We are simply pointing out that fruit and taste can be reasonably explained by evolution so it is not disproven. Of course it is not proven either.

The OP poses a question of possible "irreducible complexity", how to have yummy fruit and animals that like yummy fruit, at the same time, when one is no good without the other. The OP compounds this question by bringing up the diversity in flavors and animals which prefer various flavors.

An animal spreading plant seeds helps the plant, whether or not Evolution is true, and it doesn't really answer the OP.

Suppose a fruit developed flavor X, but there was no animal to like flavor X...

Animals detected what food was yummy or not long before fruit evolved to taste yummy.

Please elaborate.

Easy. Just look at animals today. Or just look at yourself. You eat a lot of non-fruits like meat, carrots, and sugar. Many of these things taste good.

You said that if animals liking a particular flavor came first that this could not have happened through natural selection.

Our sense of taste exists to encourage is to eat high energy food and avoid food with no nutritional value or is poisonous. That is why meat and sugar taste so good and roots and leaves are not appealing. So a sense of taste could have evolved because eating the right stuff improves your chances of survival.

So exclusively vegetarian species may have taste buds reacting to meat?

Meat has a lot of energy but the only problem is that it can be hard to catch. So there are pros and cons to being a carnivore and pros and cons to being a herbivore.

Herbivores have bodies built for processing plants so even though meat has a lot of energy it is just not very useful for them. That is why they don't have taste buds telling them meat tastes good.

Do not de rail this thread. You said animals evolved to like the taste of sugar, OK, why did fruits evolve to taste different than sugar?

Sugar is one out of many things that we have come to like the taste of. Fruit tastes sweet because it has a lot of sugar. Much of the fruit taste is the sugar taste mixed with other flavors.

I think this whole debate is about you not understanding how taste really works.

Here is a good link on how taste works.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 7:33:57 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 6:48:12 AM, VelCrow wrote:
At 5/27/2016 11:33:33 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
Explanations, like lies, need other explanations or lies to keep them in the comment market.

In this discussion we have animals eating fruit, nuts and etc, which they have developed a taste for, as well as them being a necessary diet.

Now, does evolution have that very clever "creation trick" of evolving plants and fruits of various kinds, trees for birds and apes to live in, nuts and berries for the bears, underground roots and yams for the moles, flowers with suitable pollen for the pollinators , and have evolved a healthy, life sustaining habitat before the first animals is on the earth?

What if the first animal to appear, even if the habitat was there, bit into a fruit, and said "Yuck" and died of starvation?

Remember in all this, you evolutionists are talking about millions of years to evolve all this magical garden and its animal inhabitants. How would "Evolution Random Process" of animals know what would be nice to eat before those animals ever evolved?

Don't you think to create an environment where all life could live and be fully and healthily maintained before the animal appears is a bit much to ask of a chance evolutionary event? Come on People, be serious!!!!!

Would we expect those great foliage gulping dinosaurs to be delicately picking a cherry sized peach and going "Yum Yum, I only need another hundred pound or so of these for lunch?

It is no wonder that many humans believe in a creator, when we have the extraordinary acceptance that all the things happened by chance.

When is anyone going to explain "instinct" to me, as an evolutionary process.

Let me give you an example. Suppose there are 100 animals (lets call them X) living with plants that gives fruit (lets call the fruits Y). in the beginning, half of X like eating Y and half of X didnt like eating Y. Those that did not like eating Y had nothing else to eat and thus eventually dies of starvation. On the other hand, those X that like eating Y, had abundance of food and did not die of starvation and are more likely to pass their genes to the next generation of X. Eventually, you will find that the majority of population of X that still survives will like eating Y.

ME: Simple, that simple that you have animals and plants miraculously materializing together.

Now is that simple enough for you to understand? Can you find any faults with this explanation?
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 7:39:39 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 4:57:17 AM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
At 5/26/2016 2:02:24 AM, distraff wrote:
At 5/25/2016 2:11:20 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
There are many types of fruits, various kinds of flavors.

Now, of course atheists nay evolutionists will cry - hey those flavors just had to happen, evolution is not planned.

But every plant has to face the NATURAL SELECTION .

Why is there variety in flavours, cause animals living in that particular area liked their tastes?

Which one happened first- animals liking a particular flavour or plants evolving to have those flavors ?

If the latter is true, it can NOT get through natural selection and if the prior is true..

the world is the work of a creator.


Animals originally evolved taste to distinguish between that are good for you and food that is dangerous. This happened long before there was fruit and animals were eating food like grass long before there was fruit. So this actually can happen through natural selection.

Animals evolved so that sugar tasted good because sugar has a lot of calories and calories is energy. So trees evolved the fruit taste so that it would have a taste that was pleasant to animals.

Sugar always tasted like sugar.

Flavors are not just different concentrations of sugar, there are pleasant smells, aromas and taste is very different too.

So the animals evolving liking a particular flavor came first.

How?

ME: So you are saying that the animals developed a particular liking for certain flavours, and evolution in is great wisdom then evolved such plants and fruits...Giving a few million years between.