An inventive mechanism (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 06, 2014, 19:21 (3729 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: We now have six hypotheses, bearing in mind that evolution entails common descent (i.e. all organisms have descended from earlier organisms): 1) Evolution happened through innovations caused by random mutations; 2) Evolution didn't happen: God made every species independently at the same time; 3) Evolution didn't happen: God made every species separately at different times; 4) Evolution happened: God preprogrammed the first cells to pass on every stage of it; 5) Evolution happened: God directed it through innovations, as he inserted sequences of new computer programmes into different existing cell communities; 6) Evolution happened through innovations created by intelligent cell communities, whose intelligence may or may not have been created by a God.
> 
> What have I missed out?-I totally reject any possibility of your 1,2,3, and especially 6. 4 & 5 are the only possibilities I accept. If you will study this explanation you will see why:-The reason I so strongly oppose dhw's cell community theory is that it faces a statistical nightmare. The key issue is the understanding of the organic chemistry of life, once established. Life consists of interactive protein molecules which must work together when any inventive improvement is added to any current station in time in evolution. For a new function new molecules have to be found to do the new work together. -A simple protein molecule is 150-200 or more amino acids strung together. They must be in a certain order and have a certain folding pattern to produce the desired function. Folding reduces choice by its required specificity. From the possible landscape of protein combinations available, choice is limited by life to left-handed amino acids and right-handed sugars, cutting the landscape in half. -An example of a 'chance' calculation:-"The probability of one amino acid being correct is 1/20. The probability of two amino acids being correct is 1/20 x 1/20. So the probability of a sequence of 287 amino acids being correct is 1/20 raised to the power of 287 or one in 10 raised to the power of 373. In everyday terms, this is the same chance as tossing a die and getting 479 sixes in a row"- http://www.changinglivesonline.org/questions-and-answers/item/880-could-a-protein-molec... problem: protein chemistry reactions are exceedingly slow, thousands of years, unless enzymes are present. Enzymes have lock and key areas that hold specific molecules in place and literally force them to react. Enzymes are giant molecules of amino acids (a-a), often with two or three different patterns of organization as coils, straight and jumbles, with 3-4,000 a-a's or more involved again with specific folding and twisting. Think of the odds to find one of these that works, and they are throughout living organs each specific enzyme doing a very specific job. -Then there is the issue of a construction plan. The embryology of a new part of an organ has to develop a plan of construction, changed from the plan that preceded it to produce the new function. -What I am describing is complex specific forms to create a new function. All of this requires complex specific informational planning, especially since we have agreed chance does not work. A community of cells cannot make a number of these steps all at once. They do not have the planning capacity. It has to be trial and error. Darwin evolution is trial and error. For me a designing agent is the only logical answer. -Tony's suggestions about God handling the DNA computer program makes perfect sense