The life cycle of a fig is bizarre.

submitted by Canbot from files.catbox.moe

all 27 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Tom_BombadilBombadildo 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

An incest sex dungeon is contained within every delicious fig.

[–]Tom_BombadilBombadildo 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Those chivalrous incest ants have giant dinguses.

[–]binaryblob 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The fig wasp, also known as the Alabama wasp.

If you see this, you would almost think these were engineered by aliens instead of just the result of evolution. It's strange that co-evolution would lead to much of an ecosystem.

[–]Tom_BombadilBombadildo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

/u/Jesus cursed the fig tree in Matthew 21:18-22:14, because that tree had failed to service the incest ants.

That's why there was no fruit.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

And an evolutionist will look at this and say

hmyes this seems like a logical thing to have happen, if we wave our hands and say "a long, long time ago"

[–]Canbot[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

An evolutionist will say that this bizarre symbiotic relationship would only occur through a long process of itteration starting with systems that made sense in a different form and in different conditions. Then as conditions changed, and random mutations accumulated the system evolved into this illogical state. Where as an intelligent designer would not create a system that is this illogical and vulnerable to extinction.

[–]Erasmus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The two are not in conflict.

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

unless you can't read. they are entirely in conflict.

[–]Erasmus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

i see i see. however you only have 1 problem with this and it is a very small problem. if god guided evolution to where it is now... why wasn't this covered in the bible?

[–]Erasmus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Christianity is just a subset of theism. Arguing for theism or deism doesn't mean arguing for Christianity.

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

in the link it said god guided evolution. regardless if your christian or not. you still must prove a god exist for him to guide evolution. doesn't help that other believers don't even believe in evolution.

[–]Erasmus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

you still must prove a god exist for him to guide evolution

Well, you must hypothesize that God exists. The hypothesis comes before proof, and guides its pursuit.

But I'm not sure we can prove God exists. There are plenty of true things we can't prove, even in the much more limited universe of mathematics. We usually call those propositions conjectures, but Gödel showed that there are true conjectures that can't be proven.

doesn't help that other believers don't even believe in evolution

"According to Eugenie Scott, Director of the US National Center for Science Education, 'In one form or another, Theistic Evolutionism is the view of creation taught at the majority of mainline Protestant seminaries, and it is the official position of the Catholic church".'

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_evolution_by_religious_groups

But again, I'm not defending Christianity here. It might help to think of the word "God" as just a handy placeholder for describing a certain kind of deep mystery behind all existence.

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well hypothesizing a god atleast requires some bit of proof. for me i understood the concept of gravity by witnessing the process in real time. and understanding their was a rule to it. while the rules of gravity is little more complex, the cliff note is. what goes up. must come down. a universal rule of life. with god their are many rules. but upon breaking them... nothing happens. so hypothesizing a god! would have first require prerequisites in order to carry out this theory.

 

According to Eugenie Scott, Director of the US National Center for Science Education, 'In one form or another, Theistic Evolutionism is the view of creation taught at the majority of mainline Protestant seminaries, and it is the official position of the Catholic church

 

Yeah sorry about that i should've been more clear on that one. yes i am familiar with the statistic that their are more believers who believe in evolution then not. what i meant was. their are people who use the bible. to not believe in evolution, in lue of their own stupidity.

 

And i wouldn't use "god" as a place holder for a mythical thing that could've made everything. i get what you mean. their could be in all possibility a god! but that term is human in nature. if their were to be a god... it may not be the god that we think it is. a true god could've possibly been a human with demigod levels of power. but only had enough power, to make like... 50% of the universe. died, and everything else went on autopilot. or something like that.

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ha! gottem!

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

is that a dig at evolution?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

No comrade, it's a dunk on evolutionists for not having the sense god gave a literal child, able to disbelieve obvious falsehoods in a fairy story

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

well first things first. one must prove a god exist. 2nd. you! must first disprove evolution and not only evolution but science as a whole!

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

God proves himself by the existence of his creation and obvious design in it when considered

Evolution disproves itself according to Mr. Darwin's own commentary on the concept of irriducible complexity

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

God proves himself by the existence of his creation and obvious design in it when considered

But how do we know that? and how do we know we were the products of a intelligent creator when their are so many flaws and imperfection within the human body?

Evolution disproves itself according to Mr. Darwin's own commentary on the concept of irriducible complexity

While i am fairly familar with dawin's work. i've never heard of that one. but after some research i can show you this quote from a wiki i found%20is%20the,selection%2C%20which%20would%20need%20all)

 

the concept of irreducible complexity has been rejected by the scientific community,[3] which regards intelligent design as pseudoscience.[4] Irreducible complexity and specified complexity, are the two main arguments used by intelligent-design proponents to support their version of the theological argument from design.[2][5]

 

Inshort. even if darwin proposed this theory. alot of scientist have rejected this claim... because it doesn't make alot of sense. and requires proof.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

How do we use our logical faculties

some of us don't, apparently

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

didn't disprove any of my points

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

did actually but unsurprisingly u missed it all

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

no. you asserted god made everything as self evident by everything... which is bullshit logic. and then discredited evolution using darwin's theory or whatever. despite his irreducible claim being defunked by the scientific community as a whole. so please tell me what you said that disproved any of my points.

[–]BloBackEntertainment 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

th-the fuck?

[–]WoodyWoodPeckerHah he he he hah! 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Jesus hates FIGS not FAGS! https://www.crossway.org/articles/why-did-jesus-curse-a-fig-tree-matthew-21/