The following is a link to a 15-minute video which asserts a
Creationist claim that I had not heard before:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoBTZx_vISw>

To the best of my knowlege, the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP)
doesn't inform the honeybees' waggle dance or the information they
convey with it. Instead, their waggle dance conveys a direct path to
where exists a specific source of nectar.

Also, regardless of whether bees use Optic Flow Monitoring (OFM),
doesn't alter the fact that human designers independently figured out equivalent algorithms.

Aside from the above misrepresentations of fact, the passage from Job
12:7-9:

"7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you,
or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you,
or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know
that the hand of the Lord has done this?"

doesn't explain anything the narrator claims it explains.

In short, a willfully stupid DESTROYER OF AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLDVIEW.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 10/30/2023 11:31 PM, jillery wrote:

The following is a link to a 15-minute video which asserts a
Creationist claim that I had not heard before:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoBTZx_vISw>

To the best of my knowlege, the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP)
doesn't inform the honeybees' waggle dance or the information they
convey with it. Instead, their waggle dance conveys a direct path to
where exists a specific source of nectar.

Also, regardless of whether bees use Optic Flow Monitoring (OFM),
doesn't alter the fact that human designers independently figured out equivalent algorithms.

Aside from the above misrepresentations of fact, the passage from Job
12:7-9:

"7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you,
or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you,
or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know
that the hand of the Lord has done this?"

doesn't explain anything the narrator claims it explains.

In short, a willfully stupid DESTROYER OF AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLDVIEW.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

The "bumble bees can't fly" creationist argument was better. Some god
could supposedly do anything, and if we did find creations such as
hummingbirds with wings made out of gold, and they were still flying
around, that would be evidence that hummingbirds had been created. All
we have are things that could happen naturally.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 05:56:24 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

On 10/30/2023 11:31 PM, jillery wrote:

The following is a link to a 15-minute video which asserts a
Creationist claim that I had not heard before:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoBTZx_vISw>

To the best of my knowlege, the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP)
doesn't inform the honeybees' waggle dance or the information they
convey with it. Instead, their waggle dance conveys a direct path to
where exists a specific source of nectar.

Also, regardless of whether bees use Optic Flow Monitoring (OFM),
doesn't alter the fact that human designers independently figured out
equivalent algorithms.

Aside from the above misrepresentations of fact, the passage from Job
12:7-9:

"7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you,
or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you,
or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know
that the hand of the Lord has done this?"

doesn't explain anything the narrator claims it explains.

In short, a willfully stupid DESTROYER OF AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLDVIEW.

The "bumble bees can't fly" creationist argument was better. Some god
could supposedly do anything, and if we did find creations such as >hummingbirds with wings made out of gold, and they were still flying
around, that would be evidence that hummingbirds had been created. All
we have are things that could happen naturally.

On looking up the history of that meme, I ran across the following: ***************************************
According to laws of aerodynamics, the bumble bee cannot fly;
its body is too heavy for its wings and that's the simple reason why.
But the bumble bee doesn't know this fact, and so it flies anyway for
all to see.
Remember this when you're losing faith or hope; God's proof that the
impossible can be.
***************************************

A problem with the above is embedded in the very first line. Whoever
made that claim used an incomplete and so inaccurate law of
aerodynamics.

Another problem is in its last line. It's a fact that bumble bees
fly, and not because they violate physics, and not because God's will
elevates them.

But it gets some things right. Neither bees nor people should stop
doing what they do just because someone else says they're wrong or its impossible. Experts are people too, and so fallible by definition.

Bottom line is, faith and hope give courage to accept risks and endure hardships, but aren't excuses to act blind, deaf, and dumb.

<https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/deciphering-mystery-bee-flight-1075#:~:text=In%201934%2C%20in%20fact%2C%20French,keep%20the%20hefty%20bugs%20aloft.>

<https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2017.0159>

<https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/fluidsengineering/article-abstract/145/1/011303/1146049/The-Importance-of-Morphology-in-Further-Unraveling?redirectedFrom=fulltext>

<https://theness.com/index.php/scientists-report-bumblebees-cant-fly/>


--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 11/4/2023 4:38 AM, jillery wrote:

On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 05:56:24 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

On 10/30/2023 11:31 PM, jillery wrote:

The following is a link to a 15-minute video which asserts a
Creationist claim that I had not heard before:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoBTZx_vISw>

To the best of my knowlege, the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP)
doesn't inform the honeybees' waggle dance or the information they
convey with it. Instead, their waggle dance conveys a direct path to
where exists a specific source of nectar.

Also, regardless of whether bees use Optic Flow Monitoring (OFM),
doesn't alter the fact that human designers independently figured out
equivalent algorithms.

Aside from the above misrepresentations of fact, the passage from Job
12:7-9:

"7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you,
or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you,
or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know
that the hand of the Lord has done this?"

doesn't explain anything the narrator claims it explains.

In short, a willfully stupid DESTROYER OF AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLDVIEW.

The "bumble bees can't fly" creationist argument was better. Some god
could supposedly do anything, and if we did find creations such as
hummingbirds with wings made out of gold, and they were still flying
around, that would be evidence that hummingbirds had been created. All
we have are things that could happen naturally.

On looking up the history of that meme, I ran across the following: ***************************************
According to laws of aerodynamics, the bumble bee cannot fly;
its body is too heavy for its wings and that's the simple reason why.
But the bumble bee doesn't know this fact, and so it flies anyway for
all to see.
Remember this when you're losing faith or hope; God's proof that the impossible can be.
***************************************

A problem with the above is embedded in the very first line. Whoever
made that claim used an incomplete and so inaccurate law of
aerodynamics.

Another problem is in its last line. It's a fact that bumble bees
fly, and not because they violate physics, and not because God's will elevates them.

But it gets some things right. Neither bees nor people should stop
doing what they do just because someone else says they're wrong or its impossible. Experts are people too, and so fallible by definition.

Bottom line is, faith and hope give courage to accept risks and endure hardships, but aren't excuses to act blind, deaf, and dumb.

<https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/deciphering-mystery-bee-flight-1075#:~:text=In%201934%2C%20in%20fact%2C%20French,keep%20the%20hefty%20bugs%20aloft.>

<https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2017.0159>

<https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/fluidsengineering/article-abstract/145/1/011303/1146049/The-Importance-of-Morphology-in-Further-Unraveling?redirectedFrom=fulltext>

<https://theness.com/index.php/scientists-report-bumblebees-cant-fly/>

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

Behe moderated the argument, but it is the same denial argument for his
IC systems and "the Edge of Evolution" stupidity. Behe keeps claiming
that there are some things in nature that could not exist by natural
means, but he just hasn't been able to verify the existence of any of
them. In the Edge of Evolution claptrap he demonstrates that he could
verify these instances if he ever found any, but all he can claim to
find are examples that skirt the edge. He acknowledges that they could
happen naturally, and he just claims that somewhere out there are
examples that exceed his limits. He just hasn't found them yet.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 10/30/23 21:31, jillery wrote:

The following is a link to a 15-minute video which asserts a
Creationist claim that I had not heard before:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoBTZx_vISw>

To the best of my knowlege, the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP)
doesn't inform the honeybees' waggle dance or the information they
convey with it. Instead, their waggle dance conveys a direct path to
where exists a specific source of nectar.

Also, regardless of whether bees use Optic Flow Monitoring (OFM),
doesn't alter the fact that human designers independently figured out equivalent algorithms.

Aside from the above misrepresentations of fact, the passage from Job
12:7-9:

"7 But ask the animals, and they will teach you,
or the birds in the sky, and they will tell you;
8 or speak to the earth, and it will teach you,
or let the fish in the sea inform you.
9 Which of all these does not know
that the hand of the Lord has done this?"

doesn't explain anything the narrator claims it explains.

In short, a willfully stupid DESTROYER OF AN EVOLUTIONARY WORLDVIEW.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

This is a test post.

If a supreme being is summum bonum and
low entropy is good and high entropy is evil

then

the passage from Job could simply be a restatement
of the idea that life is of a lower entropy than
non-life.

This is generally thought to be true by many scientists.

This is a test post.

It may not actually be sent.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)