Genome complexity: pseudogenes (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, August 29, 2013, 15:40 (4105 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw:The intelligent cell/genome would be sufficient to explain the innovations that drive evolution and cause the "punctuated jumps".-Your major problem is not being able to explain where the intelligence came from. In the past you have conjured it up. It just magically appears.
> 
> dhw: So how does ENCODE lead to the failure of common descent and natural selection as an evolutionary paradigm? Or do you now agree that it doesn't?-It doesn't because I add God's planning. Common descent and natural selection are taking a battering from findings I have mentioned: orphan genes, orphan proteins, loack of genetic homology in trying to make a bush of life look coherent. CD and NS can't work by chance alone.-> dhw: As regards teleology, I did respond to that earlier, and I think the point is worth developing. Survival of the individual, propagation of the species, self-improvement, exploration, experimentation etc. may be purposes in themselves at all levels of existence. If Margulis is right, and bacterial cells "as already 'conscious' entities" merged to create the eukaryotic cell, you can extrapolate a whole purposeful pattern of evolution from this one advance, but it does not need to be God-driven. The drive can come from within. And so if there is no such thing as junk DNA, that is because organisms inevitably retain what is useful as they fulfil their own purposes. This may be a blow to atheism, but it is not a blow to evolution, which as you yourself have confirmed is perfectly compatible with belief in God.-Your comment is left intact, so I can point out that again you are magically inserting comments like: " the drive can come from within' and "they fulfill their own purposes". Sounds to me a single-celled eukaryote has a little planning brain. Yes, teleology is everywhere you look, and you want that by chance also.