By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Anti-Spore site launches, cites “attack on Christian values”

The_vagabond7 on 10 September 2008
Avalach21 said:
Lafiel said:
TruckOSaurus said:
Avalach21 said:
Spore makes a joke out of the evolutionary theory, if anything.

Honestly, playing the game made me more skeptical of the theory of evolution. I'm the player, and I have to decide what body parts will help my animal survive, and it makes me wonder how an unconscious... entity... like nature itself... can make decisions like that. It seems far fetched.

Maybe you should read a bit more on the theory of evolution... nature doesn't decide anything :

The strongest members of a species survive in greater number because of x attribute so that attribute is more likely to be passed on to the next generations while the members with useless attribute y don't survive as well so with time this attribute disapears.

 

 

I wouldn't say strongest, but "fittest".

for example in Australia the bigger snakes die, because they can eat the big cane toads, which produce enough poison to kill those snakes, while the smaller ("weaker") ones of the same species only can eat smaller cane toads, which don't have enough poison an hence land snakes in australia are getting smaller - this is a modern example of evolution

Your example isn't evolution... it's survival of the fittest.  Nothing evolved, the bigger snakes die out and the smaller snakes live.  Nothing has evolved.

 

Evolution in process. It takes so long for something to evolve you'll never be able to point at something and say "it's evolving!".

 



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Around the Network
Sam Yikin on 10 September 2008

Anyway about the site, it's just further proof that fundamentalists of any religion suck.



TruckOSaurus on 10 September 2008

I blame Pokemons for skewing how people view evolution!



Signature goes here!

Lafiel on 10 September 2008

@ The_vagabond7 )

uhm.. well, we can observe evolution of bacteria, because their life-cycles are short and their reprodution rates high enough



The_vagabond7 on 10 September 2008

lol, ok bacteria you can see evolve. But most large scale creatures will take too long to have any before and after photos.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Around the Network
Sam Yikin on 10 September 2008
Avalach21 said:
Lafiel said:
TruckOSaurus said:
Avalach21 said:
Spore makes a joke out of the evolutionary theory, if anything.

Honestly, playing the game made me more skeptical of the theory of evolution. I'm the player, and I have to decide what body parts will help my animal survive, and it makes me wonder how an unconscious... entity... like nature itself... can make decisions like that. It seems far fetched.

Maybe you should read a bit more on the theory of evolution... nature doesn't decide anything :

The strongest members of a species survive in greater number because of x attribute so that attribute is more likely to be passed on to the next generations while the members with useless attribute y don't survive as well so with time this attribute disapears.

 

 

I wouldn't say strongest, but "fittest".

for example in Australia the bigger snakes die, because they can eat the big cane toads, which produce enough poison to kill those snakes, while the smaller ("weaker") ones of the same species only can eat smaller cane toads, which don't have enough poison an hence land snakes in australia are getting smaller - this is a modern example of evolution

Your example isn't evolution... it's survival of the fittest.  Nothing evolved, the bigger snakes die out and the smaller snakes live.  Nothing has evolved.

 

 

That's what evolution is. Survival of the fittest. Mutations allow certain members of a species to live and pass on their genes. Over time these changes add up, creating the process of evolution.



largedarryl on 10 September 2008
Lafiel said:
@ The_vagabond7 )

uhm.. well, we can observe evolution of bacteria, because their life-cycles are short and their reprodution rates high enough

Also one of the reasons why nobody has been able to disprove the theory of evolution.  Because when scientific theory is applied correctly, you run experiments to try an disprove the theory.  With evolution, I have ran my own studies with a petri dish of bacteria and failed to disprove evolution, hence the theory is still feasibly valid.  Also no tests done by professional scientists have been able to disprove evolution by using bacteria as a test bed.

 



Sam Yikin on 10 September 2008
The_vagabond7 said:
Avalach21 said:
Lafiel said:
TruckOSaurus said:

Maybe you should read a bit more on the theory of evolution... nature doesn't decide anything :

The strongest members of a species survive in greater number because of x attribute so that attribute is more likely to be passed on to the next generations while the members with useless attribute y don't survive as well so with time this attribute disapears.

 

 

I wouldn't say strongest, but "fittest".

for example in Australia the bigger snakes die, because they can eat the big cane toads, which produce enough poison to kill those snakes, while the smaller ("weaker") ones of the same species only can eat smaller cane toads, which don't have enough poison an hence land snakes in australia are getting smaller - this is a modern example of evolution

Your example isn't evolution... it's survival of the fittest.  Nothing evolved, the bigger snakes die out and the smaller snakes live.  Nothing has evolved.

 

Evolution in process. It takes so long for something to evolve you'll never be able to point at something and say "it's evolving!".
Unless you're playing Pokémon.

Sam Yikin on 10 September 2008
The_vagabond7 said:
lol, ok bacteria you can see evolve. But most large scale creatures will take too long to have any before and after photos.

 

We do have some amount of fossil evidence.



largedarryl on 10 September 2008

@Sam Yikin, I actually think we a fairly large amount of fossil evidence.

I think Spore should have made several changes to the creature editor to make it more "evolution like". Things like the inability to remove body parts that have been added, ability to only add so many spinal bones per change, have the size of older parts limit the ability of newer parts, etc. The only problem with the evolution thing and Spore is that Spore isn't based around the evolution in the first 2 stages of the game (the shortest and easiest 2), but this part of the game could be remade into a new game called SimEvolution.

The entire game is gearing up to the space stage, which is where the fundamentalists should really be tearing into the game. Life on other planets, an actual omnipotent being you can actually talk to, etc. These are the aspects of the game that really slash into the Christian fundamentalist views.