If evolution occurs through incremental steps, how did the bombadier beetle evolve, atheists? It shoots BOILING WATER at its enemies through a complex chemical reaction. If the chemicals were even slightly different or mixed the wrong way, the beetle would explode. There's no way it could evolve its internal chemical reactions incrementally.
Checkmate, atheists.
Other urls found in this thread:
...
> masturbating
> wonder if sin
> looks at penis
> mushroom at end to scrape out competitor sperm
> created for monogamy
> the juice is loose
Yeah, that's what I thought. No answers, eh atheists.
All the beetles that evolved with the wrong chemicals exploded leaving only the ones with the right mix left to breed and continue.
Yes, but you can't get there INCREMENTALLY. The whole mechanism has to appear in one go. You can't get this chemical reaction a bit at a time, so it can't EVOLVE.
Explain this
m.youtube.com
I don't have to prove a negative. You have to prove that evolution works every single time, 100%. That's how science works, right atheist? The bombadier beetle is proof that evolution CAN'T account for everything because it's not physically possible for it to evolve through incremental steps.
thats the increment.
like there was a baby born with an extra arm. If that was a desirable trait that aided in survival. (Ideally if that person was male) he could breed with others to create more children that might have extra arms and then they would go off to reproduce etc etc.
its not like a baby would ahve to be born with a finger coming out of its chest and then its son would have a hand and then the next generation would have a forearm and then a full arm.
the whole mechanism was the increment.
Hahahahahahahaaaaa
It evolved from a lesser chemical defense, growing in complexity over many generations. Much as the modern artillery piece evolved from the simple bombard.
Check fucking mate.
You think a beetle was hatched one day which just happened randomly to have the ability to mix specific chemicals to create burning liquid? And that this is more likely than a Designer?
If ANYTHING was different, the beetle would just explode. There's no "lesser" version. Unless you get this specific mix on the first try, the beetle blows up.
Googled Bombadier Beetle because it sounded interesting, saw this on Wikipedia, I'm still a theist though...
The full evolutionary history of the beetle's unique defense mechanism is unknown, but biologists have shown that the system could have theoretically evolved from defenses found in other beetles in incremental steps by natural selection.[7][8] Specifically, quinone chemicals are a precursor to sclerotin, a brownish substance produced by beetles and other insects to harden their exoskeleton.[9] Some beetles additionally store excess foul-smelling quinones, including hydroquinone, in small sacs below their skin as a natural deterrent against predators—all carabid beetles have this sort of arrangement. Some beetles additionally mix hydrogen peroxide, a common by-product of the metabolism of cells, in with the hydroquinone; some of the catalases that exist in most cells make the process more efficient. The chemical reaction produces heat and pressure, and some beetles exploit the latter to push out the chemicals onto the skin; this is the case in the beetle Metrius contractus, which produces a foamy discharge when attacked.[10] In the bombardier beetle, the muscles that prevent leakage from the reservoir additionally developed a valve permitting more controlled discharge of the poison and an elongated abdomen to permit better control over the direction of discharge.[7][8]
The unique combination of features of the bombardier beetle's defense mechanism—strongly exothermic reactions, boiling-hot fluids, and explosive release—have been claimed by creationists and proponents of intelligent design to be examples of irreducible complexity.[11]
Prove God or gtfo.
Plx stop giving there people attention.
Prove evolution or GTFO.
>741087236
Do us a favor an leave the science to the mentally healthy.
...
The anti-evolutionist argument always comes from a place of limited understanding of the concepts of evolution.
See
there is more evidence to support a mutation like that than there is that some untraceable force made it so.
Exactly. Tits are simply modified sweat glands.
"But how could an animal develop a milk delivery system incrementally? The milk under the skin would go bad and cause infections"
Same dumb argument.
So when you see a watch, the first thing you assume is that all those cogs and springs and levers just assembled themselves through the random movement of minerals?
Except that evolution is a guiding force that creates complex systems. It's just isn't a divine guiding force.
Nice b8 m8 I r8 8
...
When you see an adult human, do you think their arms and legs were attached to their torso in a factory at the current size they are now?
Genetic interactions like the recombination of genes during sexual reproduction is very different than building a watch. Nice try tho
Evolution is "guided"? By whom?
Rekt
Selective environmental pressures and bottleneck events
Well according to your theory, watches should be evolving to grow larger, then. The longer you keep a watch, the larger it gets. It just naturally happens to things. Right?
Okay now you are being willfully ignorant. Evolution is "guided" by environment. Do you really not know this?
Doesn't know the difference between biological and inorganic materials, Kek, no wonder your love god
So why don't ALL beetles have this ability to boil chemicals? If it just occurs randomly thanks to selective pressure, we should see it happening all over. Birds and cows and lobsters should all be shooting boiling liquid out of their asses because it's just something which happens randomly.
Evolution isn't always slow and incremental. Sometimes it happens in sudden sprints.
you are implying a whole lot
Also, you are a complete retard
Why can't all birds fly? Bc evolution
Congratulations, you just quoted Professor X in the opening of the X-Men movie. Science originates in comic books, apparently.
Not quite. I got that from a book that had a lot of focus on tracking mutations in the DNA of mitochondria.
Check out "The Seven Daughters of Eve," it's good shit.
So "because evolution" is okay, but "because Bible" is not. Just... because.
I don't think OP can read
Claims Supported observations, experimental data, fossil record vs a magic man....hmmm
So much fedora in here.
Nah. I'd say the more appropriate answer is "because weird shit happens," or just "I don't know."
If falling back on evolution without supporting evidence is as ridiculous as you make it out to be, falling back on intelligent design is even more ridiculous, because there's really zero evidence to support it.
"I don't know" > "Intelligent Design"
I'm not saying that evolution is false, but I do believe in a healthy amount of skepticism. You seem to have some irrevocable truth hidden up your twat so why don't you share this enlightenment, Mr. Smarty Pants?
Okay buddy, I've read through this thread and I'm going to try to explain this to you in the simplest way I can.
The way science works is you observe something you didn't expect, or something you want to know more about.
Next you come up with an idea that explains that thing.
Next you come up with a way to test to see if your idea is right.
If it is, you do more tests to see how right it is.
If it's not, you come up with a new idea.
Tests can be replaced with evidence in some cases, like archeology, but that evidence also needs to be tested to make sure it's kosher.
See, the reason evolutionary biology is the leading model for life (and the only one we have which makes sense) is because it is testable, as shown in that YouTube link above, because it's supported by literally all evidence ever found, excluding your little book, and because it can be applied like a math formula to things and we almost always get the right answer when we solve that formula.
You should also remember that beetles as we would call them first showed up in the fossil record about 318 million years ago in modern day Asia. Given that most insects have several generations in a single year, and that each generation births dozens of babies per mother, the sheer numbers alone should tell you that anything is possible. I mean anything. If it works, and the process of natural selection allows it to get a competitive edge against it's own species, it will flourish.
>it's not physically possible for it to evolve through incremental steps.
Argument from ignorance fallacy. How have you determined that it's not possible for it to have evolved through incremental steps? In reality it most likely is possible, it's just that you don't know how. You're confusing "I don't know how it could be possible" for "it's actually impossible".
/thread
youre making the mistake of thinking of it as a plan. Evolution simply happens and if that is an advantage to its survival and breeding then it gets passed on and proliferates in the organisms.
You dont get a beetle that for some reason starts growing towards spewing the specific concoction out of its head.
First it will be something like it needs to put digestive fluids out on its food, so spitting/squirting is preferentially evolved towards. This feature helps it in defensive moments. So this whole new niche opens up for the squirting system in the beetle, and the more toxic to foes the better, eventualy it stops being about breaking down food and simply becomes for defence. over time it preferentially becomes as potent as it can possibly be, because those potent beetles are more likely to survive than the less potent ones.
Its not a plan, it just happens and each phase can go eitherway
I feel like I encounter this a lot. A person cannot rationalize something with the data they have or the level of understanding they have, so they disregard any explanation that's above their head. It's part of a growing culture that disregards experts.
Me? I'm gonna trust the experts who spend all their time thinking, researching, and testing shit like this.
Ok, so from what I've read. You are not willing to accept the possibility that this beetle randomly evolved to shoot boiling water out of whatever it shoots it out of. But you're willing to accept that "God" Randomly decided that having a creature capable of doing this was a good idea? That's pretty much the exact same thing except one can actually be explained without having to say "It's all part of a plan."