[15Praxanant]

Go to Google and plug in “Color-shifting cuttlefish inspire TV screens.” Here are the first three paragraphs:

1. Cuttlefish are masters of disguise, able to change their skin color in less than a second to hide from predators or draw in prey for the kill. Now, scientists from MIT and elsewhere are developing cuttlefish-inspired electronic ink and screens that use less than one-hundredth the power of traditional television screens.

2. "Cuttlefish change their color by secreting different chemicals to change the spacing between membranes," said Edwin Thomas, a professor at MIT who recently co-authored a paper describing his team's new screen in the journal Advanced Materials.

3. "We have created an artificial electrical system to control the spacing between layers," he said, thereby changing the colors on the screen.

[Logaleta]

And this is related to Spirituality and Faith HOW???

[Sheestgag]

Something that rhymes with Humber?

[MilenaMKB]

G-d put cuttlefish here so we could get better TV's... duh.

[Cxcvvfbgtr]

Something that rhymes with Humber?

That's been my suspicision since the second post. The first one was actually pretty good, but it's very hard to disguise ones personality on the internet for very long.

And to answer the question posed by the thread title, no cuttlefish are not smarter than MIT scientists.

They are, however, smarter than fundamentalists Christians.

[lammaredder]

Yes, I thought as much when he began posting.

I'd still like an answer to my question. Seth??

[sFs4aOok]

LMAO. What a dork.

[Srewxardsasv]

That's been my suspicision since the second post. The first one was actually pretty good, but it's very hard to disguise ones personality on the internet for very long.

No kidding. Humber posted this sort of argument many, many times in his creationism threads: Scientists learn something about how animals function, and that function is either similar to a current technology or scientists develop a new technology based on it; therefore, creationism is true.

[Efksqhyu]

I thought the white horse was heroin?

[slima]

Someone wanted to know how this cuttlefish post is related to faith. Somehow we all have to account for the skills of the cuttlefish, and all answers, as far as I am concerned, seem related to faith.

Cuttlefish exist. Most of us probably would agree that they have marvelous features. Now, how do we account for these features?

Jews, Christians, and Muslims seem willing to agree that God created them—as well as everything else.

People of the Hindu faith may think they evolved, but I’m not totally sure.

Atheists seems to have faith in evolution. For them, cuttlefish just evolved. That seems to beg the question as to how. Even MIT scientists, with all their intelligence, can feebly reverse-engineer to approximate the skills of a cuttlefish for TV screens. To think the cuttlefish itself, unguided my any intelligence (other than possibly itself), could do it is a marvel in itself. Randomness in this world seems to produce the opposite of order and design. Perhaps the atheist, therefore, has the greatest faith of all.

Hedonists maybe don’t care. Their idol may be self, sex, and booze. Maybe their faith is that cuttlefish are not important enough to even ask how they come about.

More possibilities could be mentioned, but everyone seems to have some default perspective (I call it faith) about cuttlefish.

Since there seems to be objection about my post, however, this will be my last word about it. If you were offended, then maybe you should ask yourself the question why. For my part, I offer no apologies for putting it up.

[SDorothy28]

Since there seems to be objection about my post, however, this will be my last word about it. If you were offended, then maybe you should ask yourself the question why.

Paul, no one objected to you post. It's just that your premise was stupid. That a fish can glow, and scientists can study and learn from the properties the possess does not mean the fish are "smarter that copycat MIT scientists."(sic) Maybe, when that fish can build me a big-a$$ flat screen television, your question will be worth entertaining.

[peakyesno]

Not smart enough to not get caught. They make pretty good eating.

[pooncophy]

all answers, as far as I am concerned, seem related to faith.

Faith is not needed if the questions & answers are testable and the outcome predictable & repeatable.

Here's a question for "Seth", tho I have faith he will not answer... Do you think MIT scientists gather together Sunday morning and sing songs in praise of science? Professing their faith in the scientific method?

[KlaraNovikoffa]

Someone wanted to know how this cuttlefish post is related to faith. Somehow we all have to account for the skills of the cuttlefish, and all answers, as far as I am concerned, seem related to faith.

following that notion, all posts on this board should be in the "Spirituality and Faith" section.

Cuttlefish exist. Most of us probably would agree that they have marvelous features. Now, how do we account for these features? I do't know, I have a CPA who handles all that stuff.

Jews, Christians, and Muslims seem willing to agree that God created them—as well as everything else. There's a logical fallacy in there that should be teased out:

Even the Pope has said that the Big Bang theory and Evolution do not conflict with the Bible.

Were I a Christian (as I am on alternating Tuesdays) I would have no problem believing in the Bible and the theory of Evolution, as there is nothing which says that God created the Universe exactly as it exists today. It could well be the Prime Movers, who put everything into action.

People of the Hindu faith may think they evolved, but I’m not totally sure. Side note: the Hindu creation story is the closest to scientific fact in many places. No one is sure why this is, but it's why scientists from Oppenheimer to Carl Sagan frequently quoted from Hindu scripture.

Atheists seems to have faith in evolution. This is another fallacy that needs to be addressed. We accept Evolution because it is supported by scientific fact. If someone came along tomorrow with a theory which fit the facts better, it would quickly become the accepted one.

Look at how quickly (in less than 30 years) the Einsteinian model of the Universe replaced the Newtonian one. Science is not (or should not be) dogmatic.

You believe in your particular religion because you chose to, without any concrete proof that what you believe is actually true. That is fine, because religion requires faith.

Scientists believe in a particular theory because they need a theoretical model to progress from. If their experiments disprove their own model, then they discard it and create a new one.

See the difference?

For them, cuttlefish just evolved. That seems to beg the question as to how. The How is what biologists all over the world are working now. Evolution provides the What and the Why, but the How is hidden in the DNA and RNA of every living thing.

Even MIT scientists, with all their intelligence, can feebly reverse-engineer to approximate the skills of a cuttlefish for TV screens. To think the cuttlefish itself, unguided my any intelligence (other than possibly itself), could do it is a marvel in itself. I can't build a 1972 Chevy Nova myself. Does that mean God made those as well?

And a clock doesn't need any intelligence to run. You wind it up and it keeps time.

Randomness in this world seems to produce the opposite of order and design. "Randomness" is a construct of the human intellect. If the model is good enough, then nothing is random.

Perhaps the atheist, therefore, has the greatest faith of all. I know that sounds good when you say it, but I'm not sure it's actually true.

Though it could be argued that an atheist is morally superior, as you live your life according to rules you believe were set down by the Invisible Sky Wizard, while the atheist constantly has to make their own moral judgments.

Hedonists maybe don’t care. Their idol may be self, sex, and booze. Maybe their faith is that cuttlefish are not important enough to even ask how they come about. Non sequitor.

More possibilities could be mentioned, but everyone seems to have some default perspective (I call it faith) about cuttlefish. Then you're using the word "faith" incorrectly. Read Aquinas; you shouldn't just believe in something because society tells you to or because that was the way you were raised. You should rigorously and vigorously test your faith. You should put it under intense intellectual scrutiny and be absolutely certain that it is right. It should never be a passive thing.

Since there seems to be objection about my post, however, this will be my last word about it. If you were offended, then maybe you should ask yourself the question why. For my part, I offer no apologies for putting it up. If you don't want to discuss it, why post in the first place?

I've a feeling that your faith can't stand up to close scrutiny. If that's the case, how can it be any faith at all?

[fruttomma]

Since there seems to be objection about my post, however, this will be my last word about it. If you were offended, then maybe you should ask yourself the question why. For my part, I offer no apologies for putting it up.

Humber, if you're going to be deceitful and pretend to be a new poster, you should be more careful about sounding like yourself. You have said this very thing, almost verbatim, several times in the past.

[soajerwaradaY]

Humber, if you're going to be deceitful and pretend to be a new poster, you should be more careful about sounding like yourself. You have said this very thing, almost verbatim, several times in the past.

Careless deceit & Humber are synonymous. but as long as he's lying for Jesus...

[VonErmad4]

Perhaps the atheist, therefore, has the greatest faith of all. Not believing in god requires no faith whatsoever, genius.