answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

The Fibonacci argument is usually presented by those who have a misinformed understanding of how evolution works. They will express that, because evolution is random it should be impossible to find these in nature sequences in nature. However evolution is not random.

Mutations are random but natural selection is quite the opposite.

User Avatar

Wiki User

8y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

8y ago

On this and a thousand other even more perplexing questions (such as the staggering wisdom within every cell), Evolutionists leave themselves no alternative other than to invoke random coincidence.

Creationists see this as just one more indication of God's deliberate and purposeful act of Creation.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

8y ago

It is a surprising fact that the Fibonacci series can be found in the arrangement of leaves on the stem of higher plants. In the great majority of plants with spiral arrangement, the arrangement conforms to Fibonacci numbers. However, there are patterns other than the Fibonacci spiral pattern in the plant kingdom. It is not the only one present and is therefore not a necessary pattern, Plants have simply developed the best solution to meet a need, such as maximising leaf exposure to sunshine. Evolution does not require these patterns to be random, nor are they evidence of design.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How do evolutionary scientists answer the Fibonacci argument for intelligent design?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

Is one argument against gradualism as an evolutionary model?

i dont know thats why i asked u


What is the argument by design?

The argument by design, also known as the teleological argument, posits that the complexity and order in the universe suggest the presence of an intelligent designer. It argues that the intricate design and purpose in nature imply the existence of a creator or higher power. This argument is often used to support the existence of God or some form of intelligent being behind the universe.


What does The Argument from Design theory claim?

Ir is an argument, not a theory. Claims the living world is too complex to have been evolved. Generally used by people totally ignorant of evolutionary processes and has no supporting evidence.


What does design argument mean?

The design argument, also known as the teleological argument, is an argument for the existence of God based on the idea that the complexity and order in the natural world indicate the existence of a designer. It suggests that the intricate design and purposeful arrangement of the universe point towards an intelligent creator.


What tone does Susan B. Anthony use in the passage to encourage audiences hostile to her argument to continue to listen?

By using an intelligent and straightforward tone that shows she feels very strongly about her argument


Define Evolutionary stable strategy?

Fisher's principle is an evolutionary model that explains why the sex ratio of most species that produce offspring through sexual reproduction is approximately 1:1 between males and females. A. W. F. Edwards has remarked that it is "probably the most celebrated argument in evolutionary biology".


What is aquina's design argument?

Aquinas's design argument is a philosophical argument that asserts the existence of God based on observations of the order and purpose evident in the natural world. According to Aquinas, the complexity and harmony in nature suggest a design by an intelligent creator, which he identifies as God. The argument is also known as the teleological argument, derived from the Greek word "telos," meaning purpose or end.


What are Arguments against intelligent design behind evolution?

Every argument against evolution falls into several categories. 1.) It could disprove something if it were true, but that something would not be evolution. 2.) There are no arguments for Intelligent design, all they have are arguments against evolution (and sometime plate tectonics, cosmology, mathematics's, or oceanography). 3.) Every single argument made against evolution or any other natural science in defence of intelligent design (also known as creationism as determined by a conservative Christian judge) has been used as an argument against intelligent design and backing up the science that the creationists are trying to ignore. Summary: Take any creationist claim, summarize it, and take the reverse of that and you get the scientific arguments against intelligent design and for evolution.


Is the argument from morality for the existence of god a strong argument?

The argument from morality posits that moral values point towards the existence of a higher being that establishes objective moral truths. While this argument persuades some individuals, others argue that morality can be explained through evolutionary processes or societal constructs, making it a debated topic among philosophers and theologians. Ultimately, the strength of this argument depends on one's perspective and beliefs.


Evolutionary theory responds to which argument for the existence of God by showing that complexity can arise from natural causes?

Evolutionary theory responds to the argument from design for the existence of God by demonstrating that complex biological structures can emerge through natural selection and random mutation, without the need for a designer. It provides a natural explanation for the diversity and complexity of life on Earth, which does not require the intervention of a supernatural being.


What does apologetic?

Apologetics means to defend something by use of intelligent argument. The Bible uses this word when it talks about when someone had an accusation against them (like court) the person had to defend himself by using intelligent arguments. So, apologetics has to do with defending the beliefs a person has.


Is the big bang theory a strong challenge to the cosmological argument?

As far as I understand, the Big Bang theory is not a challenge to the cosmological argument at all. The cosmological argument states that there must have been a beginning to the universe, which is confirmed by modern science. The cosmological argument further is often held to indicate that that beginning must have been an intelligent agent, which is neither confirmed nor denied by cosmology.