DILEMMAS: A Response to DHW (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, November 22, 2014, 22:11 (3652 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Do you really believe that the decision to migrate is unconnected with changing climates and is simply the result of God preprogramming the first cells with two kinds of birds/butterflies (along with countless millions of other organisms and lifestyles) - migratory and non-migratory, regardless of conditions? Butterflies have been around for at least 40 million years. Do you think the climate has remained stable in all that time? (Parts of Mexico still have severe winters.)-What you seem to forget is that migration is not entirely related to climate. Turtles migrate around the Atlantic and return to Florida, salmon migrate back and forth from ocean to inland streams. Migration ability is part of the original patterns IMHO. And I don't think you know Mexico. I've toured all over and except for the high mountain ranges it is quite warm and tropical in many areas. 
> 
> dhw: Yesterday you agreed that no one knows how much autonomy the inventive mechanism might have. Today you're back to your adaptations prescribed by your usual nebulous “information” and “guidelines”. ... Do you not find the concept of the very first cells being preprogrammed with every single species (broad sense), innovation and “complex lifestyle” - along with all the information necessary to cover every environmental change that chance throws at them - just a teeny bit fanciful?-You are the one that does not understand 'information', which is not nebulous and is accepted by all Darwin and non-Darwin commentators. I've discovered that even Wagner has two brief sentences mentioning it, stating that the code contains the information needed to make phenotypes and function. I'll repeat this until you recognize that DNA imparts information and instructions, just like when you got your computer and set it up. That we have only a partial glimmer of all that information is very obvious from the current state of research.-> 
> dhw: Not “the” balance, but “a” balance. A balance is indeed required for life to continue, and that balance is constantly changing..... If we didn't have it, we wouldn't survive, whereas other organisms would. The history of life is the history of changing conditions, whereby some species survive and some don't, because there is no constant balance. What does that prove?-I realize I have not explained clearly that I view the balance in nature as requiring a vast number the organisms, both animal and plant. When I wrote about the need for life to have a constant supply of energy, I was pointing out that the top of the heap, humans, eat those that are not at the top, and those eat others below until one gets down to bacteria at the bottom. Plants of course don't eat each other, but there must be a large variety to supply animal needs. We don't make vitamin C, but the Royal Navy discovered the need to carry limes to take care of that, hence the nickname. There are many examples. The bush has purpose through balance. You keep looking at climate balance and catastrophic events and that is a side issue.