Life as Evolving Software... (Chaitin) (Humans)

by xeno6696 @, Sonoran Desert, Saturday, December 31, 2011, 16:29 (4510 days ago) @ David Turell


What I'm trying to drill at with you here however... is not that PE is a false idea, but its that I don't understand how PE refutes the idea that evolution "speeds up and slows down on demand." I don't see how "gaps in the fossil record" dictate some phenomenal re-valuation of how we know genetic mechanisms work... I still don't understand the problem you (or Gould) is trying to solve... what is the basis for asserting that there is any real difference between evolution that "speeds up" and PE?


Please see dhw's response of today and my thoughts from today.


Further, if we agree that evolution is a demand-[driven] enterprise, than I am even more confused by the idea that epigenetics solves a problem that current thought [doesn't]...?

Evolution is not entirely demand-driven. Nor is it completely passive. Recent work I presented a couple days ago shows that pre-Cambrian gene development preceded the Explosion itself. The theory is that as oxygen increased with the new availability of many diverse but unactivated genes, the explosion could then occur. According to Darwin theory organisms must adapt to changes or threats to survive, and it turns out they can adapt quickly with epigenetic mechanisms, and not always when available genes are necessary. There is a lot more to genetics than old Darwin theory. I feel Matt is stuck back there.

This still smacks of "collecting benign changes that don't manifest rapidly under some kind of pressure." New genes can be co-opted from existing genes, in fact they have to be. Unless there's a documented instance of a gene created ex-nihilo? (Please... don't say the beginning of life... ;-) )

I think... you don't realize exactly how alike we are in thought. dhw was right--my confusion was largely based upon the narrow confines of genetics that I was exposed to. Remember, that biotechnology doesn't exactly have a lot of use for Paleontology!

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum