Just For Fun

[Really Off Topic] Technological Evolution

Spread the love

Let’s lighten things up a little:

Fast Shark

The only way I can think of to connect this to ID in any manner is DaveScot’s contention that evolution will continue via self-modification. Other than that, I just thought it was funny.

10 Replies to “[Really Off Topic] Technological Evolution

  1. 1
    jerry says:

    Everytime I hear the argument from imperfection from the Darwinists, I think of ecology and what would happen if all the species were fine tuned from an individual species perspective. My guess is that the ecology would never had developed in the first place and if they perfect themselves through Darwinian methods, it would destroy the ecology.

    So an ID hypothesis, a good ecology requires imperfection in the species in many of its characteristics and traits.

  2. 2
    Atom says:

    Word, Walter ReMine brings up the same point in “The Biotic Message” regarding a panda with a “perfect” thumb. (Perfect relative to what criteria, who knows…but one that isn’t a “false” thumb anyway.) He makes the same argument that an integrated ecosystem requires a top-down approach to the design of organisms. If one species is “too good” it may wreak havoc on the ecosystem at large.

  3. 3
    Carlos says:

    If one species is “too good” it may wreak havoc on the ecosystem at large.

    And that has, and does, happen. For example, almost everywhere humans have gone. The first Neolithich humans in the New World wiped out most the continent’s indigenous megafauna, including mastodons, ground sloths, and wild horses.

    That’s evolution, baby.

  4. 4
    Bob OH says:

    I bet you never realised that everything sold on ebay has evolved by natural selection. The common ancestor is a small red paperclip.

    Bob

  5. 5
    Alan Fox says:

    If one species is “too good” it may wreak havoc on the ecosystem at large.

    And that has, and does, happen.

    Also placental mammals introduced .to Australia, such as the rabbit, cat and fox.

  6. 6
    Fross says:

    DId you guys ever see the Saturday Night Live’s cartoon on Intelligevision?

    Darwin segment at 1:45

    Funny!!

    http://65.36.225.227/images/snl-20060114-hi.wmv

  7. 7
    AndyS says:

    In light of the Google issue and Dave Scott’s idea of copyright infringement, shouldn’t this post be deleted? I mean, it is a reproduction of copyrighted material and many websites have been had legal action taken agaisnt them for reproducing comic strips.

  8. 8
    Patrick says:

    Actually, it’s just HTML code linking to the original comic on the Sherman’s Lagoon server, not a duplication per se.

  9. 9
    AndyS says:

    Patrick, I am certain that sort of argument will not past muster in court.

  10. 10
    Patrick says:

    http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Co.....6/6-c.html

    While case law hasn’t developed definitive rules on the issue, a framer is more likely to be found liable for copyright (or trademark) infringement if copyrighted material is modified without authorization or if customers are confused as to the association between the two sites or the source of a product or service.

    The court cases listed appear to apply to instances where content was being inlined on a regular basis. I also have no idea what fair use cases say about irregular (every so often) linking of images in forums and blogs. Anyway, I kind of doubt Toomey would object to this instance, although I could just drop the image tags and leave the link itself.

Leave a Reply