Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Figure Out How Bees Fly
corbettw writes "Researchers at CalTech have discovered how bees fly, putting one more nail in the coffin of Intelligent Design. From the article: 'People in the ID community have said that we don't even know how bees fly ... We were finally able to put this one to rest. We do have the tools to understand bee flight and we can use science to understand the world around us.'"
ID people: We must be right because you can't explain everything.
Evolution People: Wait a sec, we figured something else out, you are now wrong.
Is it just me or does this have nothing to do with any scientific arguement?
I'm not sure you can call this a "nail in the coffin" of ID when there's still such a high percentage of our population that believes in it, you know? The catch-22 of ID is that it can't really be disproved with logic or science. You can shoot down their arguements when they try to put it in terms of biology like this, but I think we all know that this is not going to convince any "true believers" out there.
You have asserted that "[t]he various theories of the evolutionary process have been proven wrong time and time again."
OK. Kindly name those theories, who disproved them and in what peer-reviewed journal their work appeared.
Thank you.
Insert witty sig here.
Bee wings don't generate lift the same way other winged creatures' wings do. Most animal wings generate lift by passing air over the lifting surface. (See Bernoulli Principle) This is done by generating forward thrust or by beating the wings in an x pattern to force air over the leading edge. Bee wings are too small by surface area for this method of generating lift to work sufficiently. It is because of this fact that it has been long said that the reason bees can fly is that they are too stupid to know that they can't. Recently (I forget, within 8 years?), slow motion video and CFD analysis has revealed that Bees fly by generating a lifting vortex. The vortex is created by the wing on the up-stroke by beating at a high frequency in a figure-8 pattern. The lifting vortex acts on the entire body of the bee rather than just the wing surface thus generating sufficient lift for the bee to fly.
---k--
</stupid>
Think about this people. Why are we even having this ID/evolution debate?
Oh I know....when humans came to be they had something other animals did not: the ability to reason.
Most animals can't reason, and their whole life consists of eat/sleep/sh**/f***/survive and then die.
With humans we think beyond that, we can reason. It's a blessing and a curse.
Blessing to be so intelligent, but curse because it makes us ask the ONE single question (among other questions) that got religion started: what happens after we die???
Because humans have the ability to reason, we can't deal with the fact that nothing happens when we die. Most humans would be too paranoid to live life (because of the ability to reason and think about these abstract things), so we invent religion. We invent stories that say what happens when we die, to put us at peace. Once those stories got a hold of us, people pulling the strings busted out creation myths(ding ding ding!) and the rest is history.
So what is the point of arguing ID vs. evolution? ID is based on religion, which came about to put humans, who have the ability to reason, at peace during their lives because they can't deal with the fact that nothing happens after death. You just die.
seemingly all of their arguments are witheringly obsolete.
There's something that needs to be cleared up about this whole issue. The vast majority of these "arguments" are in fact not used at all by supporters of Intelligent Design, but are created by their opponents to make everyone think they look stupid. Sure, they may stem from some comment made by some un-educated supporter, buy why in the world is anyone taking the word of some anonymous idiot as the viewpoint of the entire group? The real supporters of intelligent design have PHDs and know what they're talking about, but never get posted on slashdot because they're not "controversial" enough.
It doesn't really matter, though; the only non-idiotic argument I've ever heard against Intelligent Design is that "It can't be disproven." (seriously) Everything else I've seen is either BS or is based on a misunderstanding of ID (like this one about bees). If you want to attack it, come back when you actually have heard the real thing, instead of laughing at idiots who claim bees can't fly.
Evidence please.
The Bible.
You've made the claim - under formal debate standards, it is now your job to uphold it. If you fail, it might seem to be implied that you can't do it.
I have asserted that it is impossible to reconcile the "facts" presented there.
Were it possible, it would fall upon you to do so.
It should be as easy as pie. After all, a perfect loving god put it there for you.
I'll even formalise it for you:
Read Matt 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20-21, Acts 1:3-12 I Corinthians 15:3-8
Now, write a simple, consistent, chronological narrative of that one day *without ommitting one single biblical detail*
Sounds easy enough, after all, it's the one day upon which the entire religion completely relies.
knock yourself out, but you will fail it. utterly.