Butterflies Full of Wasps Full of Microwasps Are a Science Nightmare (2021)

And, quite seriously, the existence of this type of horrific parasitism precludes the existence of any sort of benevolent god in my mind. It's easy to imagine a million different universes where this sort of abysmal torture doesn't exist, and it only makes sense in the view of "uncaring" evolution.

https://youtu.be/xy86ak2fQJM?si=CVL23tMUSEa28aBr

We are the only species that cares.

Also, if we release gasses that kill and impoverish large portions of us, it won't help that it's 'natural'; it will make no difference at all.

But since I have a minute, it’s also fun, perhaps, to play around with the idea that you thought "we don't know what we're doing" wasn’t - but it is! - another way of stating the same thing that you say: that we don't understand the consequences of our actions.

It’s interesting, because your rephrasing highlights the nuances of language, and the difference between literal and idiomatic, or perhaps more metaphorical interpretations. And even the differences between languages.

It's likely to be very different in other languages, such as German, or Japanese, perhaps.

But in English, the phrase, “you don't know what you're doing”, is most commonly used to mean: you do not understand the consequences of your actions; These will produce unintended effects, that will likely be different to your intended effects.

In other words, the phrase I used, in English, almost always includes the situation that you describe, rather than the seemingly more literal interpretation of “You are not aware of, nor comprehend the very actions themselves, which you take or plan to take, regarding this thing”.

It is fascinating to flip it around and see that idiomatic phrase through that more literal interpretation, that I’m assuming you made, whether for comic phrasing or not, mind!

And curious to wonder how we came to have one meaning pointed to by the sign for the other.

Although, due to the nuances of language, I can’t even be sure that it is to this more literal interpretation that you in fact are actually referring! It could be an even further far afield interpretation that has eluded me, and all the other commenters here thus far.

The endless Fascinations of language! that’s probably why we rely on idiom. But no disparagement to you for, whether knowingly or not, trying something a little different. Haha! :)

I have to admit I've never read any Darwin before, but in those 2 paragraphs he completely summarizes my feelings about the natural world.

God does not limit suffering people or animals experience. He has the utmost ability to do exactly that if he wanted, but seemingly he has taken a hands off approach, at least since about the 1600s. I guess he's not that bothered by immense suffering.

And why should he be? He made us in his image, whatever that's supposed to mean, but we also are not meant to understand his ways. Why would such a supernatural being care about the suffering of some toy creatures he made? Do you feel bad when you play action figures and one of them drowns?

The whole thing relies on the fact that the Tierra "organisms" live in a flat memory space where you can jump anywhere, including into the middle of other individuals, and just merrily keep executing code from that point. I wonder if something like that was possible in the (hypothetical) RNA world, before cell membranes developed, but I don’t think cell-based life can have a precise equivalent of Tierra hyperparasites. The closest analogue is probably mutualistic relationships that have evolved from parasitic ones.