Corvids have neural density far greater than mammals. The neural structure is different, but functionality is similar. There is no "design". Evolution worked with whatever was available in each specie, improving the functionality. This burries theological "creationism" view that things are too complex to evolve incrementally. Often cited example of "eyes" - they too have been evolved many times, and some do not have blind spot like ours ..
Curious that you read it as advocating for design. Perhaps I skimmed it too quickly but did not take that to be the point. What is interesting to me is that bird intelligence requires so much less wetwear to get sone very interesting capabilities and that it appears to be a case of convergent evolution if understood the article. This is always an iffy thing of course.
Corvids have neural density far greater than mammals. The neural structure is different, but functionality is similar. There is no "design". Evolution worked with whatever was available in each specie, improving the functionality. This burries theological "creationism" view that things are too complex to evolve incrementally. Often cited example of "eyes" - they too have been evolved many times, and some do not have blind spot like ours ..
Curious that you read it as advocating for design. Perhaps I skimmed it too quickly but did not take that to be the point. What is interesting to me is that bird intelligence requires so much less wetwear to get sone very interesting capabilities and that it appears to be a case of convergent evolution if understood the article. This is always an iffy thing of course.
The intent of the post was not to advocate one or the other, but convergent evolution is a strong evidence that there is no design.
Yes, design would also imply any number of other metaphysical things as well which I consider illogical.Not something I bother arguing about anymore.