The senses Page 2 of 2

Almost don’t know what to say after watching the above video. Surely each bit would have to have evolved or have been there at the same time as any other bit. But it wouldn’t work till it/they were all there together and fully evolved .

Ever wondered how we know where a sound is coming from. Me neither. Is it over there or behind us or to the right.. Apparently the brain detects the sound waves hitting one ear before the other.
Sound travels one mile in five seconds. Between the ears is about seven inches. That’s quite some detection to let us know. But it does it. Then there are all the contours in the shape of the ear to add more collection of sound waves and each ear sending different sound waves to brain that aid.

And it also informs us of roughly how far away it came from. So with the eyes we can find that chirping bird high up in a tree. Not sure if eyes use that way as the speed of light moving at 186 thousand miles a second might be to fast , but who knows.

Once upon a time no life on earth existed. How did we or any other animal or organism know about sound waves / airwaves that the ear uses to create sound before any ears existed in the first place. So, before the ear existed how did something know that air existed on earth that moved and it could be used to carry sound waves. Same with all the others senses. The eye. How did it know that light existed before it itself came into existence ( think i said this somewhere else) Same for all the senses we know about.

So somehow something/ life/ whatever (don’t know how to word that) knows that light exists and air exists and water and rocks and molecules and so on before any heart or lung or pancreas or liver or eye or ear or toe nail was ever formed. And it (same again don’t know how to word it) knew that it would need food. So it knew that teeth would do a good job of chewing food and so on.

Just on those teeth , they exist. There is no disputing it. It would be a natural thought to ponder if anything like evolution would be needed. Teeth seem to work very well today and in the past. They were there. To chew food. They surely weren’t naturally selected.
It could be thought that the best teeth were naturally selected in later offspring but since the mouths of millions of species of animals exist at all and have or have had a set of teeth arranged in those mouths , the it , or whatever , wouldn’t dillydally about using the absolutely bonkers notion of natural selection or random mutations when teeth could exist in the first place.

Therefore the it , if it is an it , knew about lots of things before it came to be including the fancying thing and gravity and teeth. Just on knowing about gravity it would have to know that a human should not be able to jump 10 feet upwards off the ground as the leg bones would break on landing. Try it. I managed about 6 inches. If the gravity on earth was same as the moon we would have to wear lead boots and bolt our home furniture to the floor. And on our planet we would have to teach children not to jump. In fact a little birds egg doesn’t get crushed by gravity so the egg must know the structure needed not to be crushed. And we can only throw a stone a few metres. There would be chaos if we had the strength to throw it say two miles. The game of cricket or hockey or football could not exist. And we would also have to be careful of a baby hugging us.

Trees must also know about the strength and properties of gravity. They have to grow a structure of roots going down into the soil to support for example a 10 tonne oak tree. It is hard to imagine that it relied on natural selection and mutations without knowing what it was doing. Even if it got to the point of being a successful one inch high plant at some point in the past, it would have to test all sorts of root setups to get to being able to support itself at 50 feet high. And maybe it shared it’s knowledge on how it could do it to all other species of trees. Unless each one managed it on their own. Just doesn’t make sense. Tree roots go down a bit then spread out. They know how to do it.

So, did the gravity for the planet exist and life formed itself to work in it , or did the life exist and gravity was formed for the life to exist. It seems sort of obvious but still worth a thought. (Actually, thinking again on that it is not obvious)
Anyway , once we think that it’s gravity that keeps us on the ground , we should also keep in mind that our form and structure and weight keeps us on the ground.

Along with that , our planet spins once every 24 hours. If it spun a bit faster we’d be laying flat on the ground holding on. There are theories for these happenings but there is only the same amount of scant evidence about it like the scant evidence that animals and plants have evolved through random mutation and natural selection.

It would be nice to know what it knows about the most elusive one of all . TIME

Have moved around about a bit from the senses to other things but that is where the thoughts lead and then this… If the specific thing of seeing and hearing and smelling and tasting and feeling does not rely on natural selection or random mutations , then why would the whole animal or plant rely on them either.

On a more simpler one how did eyes know that the air is see through. It’s a good job that air is see through. A bit fortunate. How did eyes know they would be able to see through the air before they existed. You couldn’t have eyes that didn’t know that air was see through. Ears also know about sound waves and noses know about smells and the tongue knows about taste. Why invent something like accidental random mutations and natural selection to further there progress when they can do what they do.

So animals and plants know the properties of themselves and the world into which they will exist before they exist. But before they exist do they or whatever or something have knowledge like we think of knowledge.. Eg scientists have worked out that water contains hydrogen and oxygen and hence h2o. So we have learnt that and it is knowledge to us. And we use words to discuss our knowledge. Life and plants obviously don’t use language to work out what they are about. They probably also don’t use maths and equations like we do. More on this later but they also do not build or put together things a bit at a time like we do.

(below.. just notes. Can’t remember what I was thinking about so will leave for now in case I remember any significance.

If natural selection is at all a a real yet invisible existence/thing for life to evolve then it would have to be part of say a plan for life to evolve , rather like having an assistant. If it is the case that without natural selection no life could evolve , then you would have to have it in place like having empty space for a planet to exist and move in.

Oh no. Just look at a nose on any animals face. Even your own. Common sense says we don’t know how any nose exists or works. Anyone might look up and then read a 300 page book in how that nose came to be through mutations and natural selection.

(There probably aren’t any books specifically on noses alone but the nose will be said to have used mutations and natural selection) But all of the noses on earth know in some way about about the composition of the air that they suck in to send around the body into all the organs of the body and blood and then blow it out as carbon dioxide.)

Isn’t it magnificent that we can even take a a few minutes to read about any niche subjects and thoughts like evolution because of the internet. Only a few people before the internet could even think about what evidence was available to say how noses evolved using natural selection and mutations. Before the internet you’d have to have access maybe to a university and then somehow have to read a mammoth technical book to be able to scrutinize the proof of how noses exist. Today it’s simple to see (in my opinion) that there is no real evidence that the nose and it’s structure was naturally selected from any random mutations.

Again, not saying at all that it’s all too wonderful and therefore evolution theories are wrong. It’s just the lack of evidence for evolution . But if you too look at these nature things and can’t quite put into words why it is that evolution ideas feel a bit weak to explain them , then maybe my words help a bit. But who knows, a fossil might be found tomorrow or the advances in DNA knowledge absolutely proves the evolution ideas.

Today , i myself dought that , as there seems like nothing to grasp onto to explain how the phenomenas exist. Take just one , like walking. Legs somehow come about to do the walking. Firstly they have to be standing on the ground in the right amount of gravity. And then we’d have to explain how the evolution that evolves legs and life and trees itself exists. If evolution has properties in itself then we would have to imagine that it also evolved. Somehow , and just sticking with just this one phenomena , the physical legs have feet with toes that have nails on them. We can imagine that our legs have changed from the monkey or ape or the animal that came before but we’d still have to explain how our an ancestors had the phenomena of legs with feet and toe nails in the first place.

Next. The brain. This is a struggle. No Google site shows how it is known or what it does properly. It is shown in drawings that this part of the brain does this and this part does that. I think i’ve gone all wokiness. Apparently people are shown happy pictures and the brain is shown to be more exited in one area compared to others. Wonder what the brain knows or makes of time.

Back on eyes. What does the eye understand about the emptiness between itself and the object it is looking at. It might know a lot more than it lets us know about. In fact it would have to know. (maybe)

And the size of eyes are likely restricted. It feels possible that they could , if they wanted to , be much larger and see further and give more detail. But if land animals had eyes say the size of a football , they would be at high risk of being damaged. On a windy day walking through a wood , chances are that a twig traveling at 30 miles an hour would sooner or later hit one of the large eyes. The mathematic probabilities would probably say that eyes of that size would be damaged sooner rather than later. It just doesn’t feel though , that natural selection was used to get the animals eyes to the necessary size that they are. There are no fossils of land animals that had eyes the size of footballs and no fossils showing that animals gradually downsized their eye size after they somehow got to that size using natural selection. So eyes , being as physically vulnerable as they are , would likely always have been the best size on any animal from the start to be as risk free to damage as is possible. A trial and error process like evolution and natural selection would get it wrong.

Also , eyelids are separate to eyes and yet eyelids close and open to look after the eyes. It’s difficult to imagine also that an evolution process brings that about. Firstly there is the non physical phenomena itself of having eyelids to lubricate and protect the eyes , and then there is the actual physicalness of the eyelids. They would of course have to be the right size themselves to fit over the eyes and have something else to sort of cause them to do their seemingly automatic opening and closing.

We can see someone else’s eye blink but don’t get blank vision ourselves. Very much like we don’t know most of the time that the heart is beating.

But if we were to jump onto say a spinning wheel and we saw ourselves and everything else moving at a comfortable speed we wouldn’t be aware that outside of our sensing the spinning wheel is moving at thousands of miles a second. We wouldn’t know about the difference. On revisiting , this last bit seems a bit silly. Not that the rest doesn’t but will leave for now and remove later.

Next chapter. Don’t be afraid...

Home