Re: TOBS: Apes Built the Pyramids

Stelios Zacharias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On 13 Nov 2003 14:50:21 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JaBrIoL)
> wrote:
> 
> >Stelios Zacharias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> On 13 Nov 2003 07:03:47 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JaBrIoL)
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >Stelios Zacharias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL 
> >> >PROTECTED]>...
> >> >> On 13 Nov 2003 03:57:38 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JaBrIoL)
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >Stelios Zacharias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL 
> >> >> >PROTECTED]>...
> >> >> >> On 11 Nov 2003 03:56:27 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JaBrIoL)
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >face it all living creatures are similar to each other.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> No, you face it. 
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> It is the implications of this phrase, written by you, that you
> >> >> >> are refusing to face. Ask yourself why all living creatures are
> >> >> >> similar to eachother. Open your eyes and ask yourself again.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Stelios
> >> >> >
> >> >> >uhh.. becuae they have the same designer?
> >> >> 
> >> >> OK - carry on: Why would a designer design all living creatures
> >> >> in the same way?
> >> >> 
> >> >> Stelios
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >because it works?
> >> 
> >> And why does it work? Does the designer's design work because he
> >> designed it, or does he only design what works? Why not design
> >> many creatures that work in a multitude of ways rather than
> >> following the tried and tested similar method? 
> >
> >why?
> 
> 
> I was asking you why. You are the one ascribing acts to a
> designer. I cannot answer why the designer designed in the way he
> did, I am asking you to tell me and help increase my knowledge in
> this subject.


I wish I knew the answer myself. I work in test engineering for my
company.
I sometimes have to reverse engineer and end of life product. Many
time I ask the same question...Why was the device is designed in a
certain fashion, it would be more efficient designed another way. I
can identify a manufacturer just based on the design, and parts used,
in the end I really cant answer for
another engineer and what was going thru his head when he designed it.
I do know that it works, and for my company, that is really the bottom
line.

Life exist on our planet, and it is in harmony and balanced. Normally
it is man that screw things up.
> 
> >> 
> >> Is the designer any more or less awe-inspiring for not using
> >> different ways of designing creatures?
> >
> >again I ask why?
> 
> I do not understand your question "why?" in this context. If you
> are asking me why I ask the question, well, by analogy with human
> design of the tangible man-made things around us, I would think a
> designer with many designs for solving the same problem would
> seem a better designer than one producing a similar design for
> all problems. That is why I ask whether it would be fair to make
> a judgement on the designer, based on the designer's designs.



I see. here something to ponder. all car's at least in the united
states have
a motor, an transmission  or transaxle and 4 wheels. They are all
powered by energy.. different companies manufacture them, diffrent
designs yes.. but basics are still there. We se a car, we called it a
car, not toyota or ford.
would you say that automobiles are elementa of poor design, because
they has yet to be a way to travel, that is quick and efficient?

> 
> 
> >the Universe is immense.. How do you know, that the designer has done
> >just as you suggest on different planes of existence.
> 
> 
> We do not know. I am trying to evaluate your posited designer
> based on what we can see around us. 
> 
> 

do you not see desin in nature? or is everything you see is based on
chance accidents per evolution?

> >here a clue..
> >
> >why did the Concorde flight ended?
> 
> 
> What has this got to do with similarities in creature design?
> 
> Stelios

A lot. here was a  Jet, that was the top of rapid transport
technology.
you get from point A to Point b very fast in comparison to other
conventional jet's... yet because of it demise, we can now called it a
failure.

why? nothing was wrong with its design...
It was because it was not cost effective. It serve no real purpose. 
In Nature all around us, every living thing serve a purpose... we
might not like it.. but it does.