View Single Post
Old 04-10-2008, 07:29 PM   #18 (permalink)
LostCause
Liberti
 
LostCause's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 504

Thunderbird - '96 Ford Thunderbird
90 day: 27.75 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
I don't see nature as providing any aerodynamic benefit beyond inspiration. It took mankind thousands of years to master flight primarily because he tried to emulate nature. Look at DaVinci's flying contraption:

Da Vinci Flying Machine


What nature did was inspire man to fly. Without birds, flying bugs, or clouds I doubt man would have ever learned to fly. Today, people try to tie in nature with their designs because it has a romantic element. Aerovironment's Solaraycer was designed after a pumpkin seed, yet a pumpkin seed is not inherently aerodynamic...

Lastly, nature does not think. Everything you see around you is (as far as we know) not a master plan, where evolution is heading in a particular direction. What you see exists solely because it was able to survive. Man is not at the "top of the evolutionary ladder," he is simply a leaf on the evolutionary bush. The most evolutionary successful creatures are single-celled organisms like bacteria, who have remained virtually unchanged for billions of years. As far as we know, nature thinks as much as planets do while orbiting stars trillions of miles away.

- LostCause
  Reply With Quote