Trilobite eyes (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 19:52 (4058 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

DAVID: These Cambrian animals had very complex eyes and horseshoe crabs today still use similar ones. The amazing part of this story is there are no ancestors to trilobites, before trilobites appeared. Who made these complex eyes? chance?-Every Darwinist's nightmare:-http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/03/looking-a-trilobite-in-the-eye.html?ref=hp
 
DHW (to David): I'm as sceptical as you about chance creating these complex mechanisms, but what exactly is your alternative explanation? You believe that evolution happened, so I presume you're not suggesting that since there are no ancestors, God indulged in separate creation. (Would it not be wiser to say there are no "known" ancestors?) Or that he "plopped in" these complex eyes. Or that the very first cells preprogrammed trilobites along with all the other new species that appeared (and in the case of trilobites disappeared) during and after the Cambrian Explosion.
 
TONY: Isn't it strange how, when presented with evidence to the contrary, the human mind will do anything to avoid saying that God did anything at all? Willful disbelief is an amazing quality, as is the ability for humanity to fabricate its own reality.-Evidence of what, exactly? If no ancestors have been found, does that provide evidence of an almighty eternal mind from nowhere that created the universe and specially created trilobites, or pre-programmed trilobites in the first cells? Might it not be possible that the fossil record from, say, 500 million years ago is incomplete? Please remember that you are the one defending a concrete belief. I'm still not certain what that is, but David has repeatedly stressed that he thinks evolution happened. He believes in anthropocentrism but not in special creation. I therefore find his attack on Darwinism inconsistent. I also believe that evolution happened, but I've no idea how its mechanisms came into being. In my situation of non-belief (not disbelief ... I'm an agnostic, not an atheist), I will certainly avoid saying that God did it, for reasons I've explained to you in my post under "Intelligence". And when people insist that God exists (and some even think they know what he's like), or that chance must have created life, I'm inclined to say: "Wilful belief is an amazing quality, as is the ability of humanity to fabricate its own reality."
 
DHW: However, we have agreed that within the genome of existing organisms is a mechanism which enables some of them to invent new organs as and when the environment demands or encourages such invention. If this is how it happened, the appearance of the trilobites is not a Darwinist's nightmare. Mutations did take place, but instead of being "random" they were directed by the "intelligent genome". The changes were not gradual (a second correction of Darwin), but some neo-Darwinists have already challenged this, and proposed "punctuated equilibrium" as an alternative. Darwin's theory still stands. Evolution driven by genomic "intelligence" instead of random mutation is still evolution, common descent is still common descent, and natural selection is still what determines the survival or otherwise of organs and species.-TONY: All of this despite the utter lack of evidence that any mutation was ever beneficial or that any mutation of any type has ever ADDED INFORMATION to the organism.-The word "mutation" simply means change. Darwin linked it to randomness, but I think my post makes it clear that I'm suggesting a non-random, "intelligent" variety. If all forms of life are descended from earlier forms, they can only have done so through a process of innovation/genomic mutation, even if your God engineered the changes. But before we go on with this discussion, I need to know once and for all whether, despite "the utter lack of evidence" that any organism ever sprang fully formed from nothing, you do or do not believe that your God created trilobites and every other species separately. If you do, what grounds do you have for believing that you yourself are not fabricating your own reality? If you don't, how do you think innovatory changes occurred?