More about how evolution works: multicellularity (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, November 06, 2015, 13:35 (3303 days ago) @ David Turell

Dhw: Of course it's conjecture, but why are your own “suppositions” more valid than his?
DAVID: He is interpreting conflict. I see no proof.-If there was proof, there would be no need for discussion. What proof do you have that multicellularity was preprogrammed 3.8 billion years ago to produce humans (not to mention the weaverbird and its nest)?-dhw: For me this is evidence of common descent, and taken in conjunction with other quotes that you have ignored, I asked: “If multicellularity evolved 25 different times, which of these is more likely: 1) that the 25 times were all preprogrammed for the sake of producing one species (humans), or 2) different cellular communities interacted and cooperated autonomously to work out different combinations (the vast variety of species extant and extinct)?” Preprogramming = planning. -DAVID: Simon Conway Morris would call this convergence, which in his eyes means humans must arrive. "Life's Solution; Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe" 2003 U. Cambridge Press. I didn't answer because the article presents pre-planning in the genetic descriptions.-Strange how you like to quote theistic scientists who agree with you, as if this gave your beliefs some authority, whereas when I quote the scientists on whose research I have based my cellular intelligence hypothesis, they are dismissed as being in a minority. I wonder how many other palaeontologists (not to mention biologists) believe that God planned evolution around humans.
 
QUOTE: "In fact, multicellularity is believed to have evolved as many as 25 different times among living species. So while the search for metazoan origins may be riddled with uncertainty, perhaps scientists can draw inferences from the study of multicellularity in other lineages."
 
Regardless of Simon Conway Morris's beliefs, I'm sorry, but I still can't see how 25 separate evolutions can be taken as evidence for the planning of a single species.-DAVID: Why don't you comment on the articles I present, like in today's material molecule transport in the cell?-I'm afraid I have to pick and choose which articles to comment on, or I would spend all day talking to you, which would be a pleasure but would result in the neglect of other necessary tasks! However, let me assure you that I read everything you post, and find most of it genuinely fascinating and educational. The walking kinesin actually made me laugh, but your comment (“Of course chance invention cannot create this”) does not require further discussion, since we have long since agreed that the complexities of life are not the product of chance.
 
We have a similar situation with the article on lichensavid's comment: How did all these guys get together to develop this complex balance of nature which makes soil from rock and helps with nutrition in so many ways? Not chance. Remember all land on Earth started as rock. Soil came later. Looks like god planning to me.-Yet another example of symbiosis, in which organisms - including plants - may be said to work out their own ways to survive. But if you believe all the details were planned and included in a computer programme God implanted in the first cells 3.8 billion years ago (along with the weaverbird's nest and the monarch's lifestyle and the wasp larva on the spider's back) in order to produce humans, so be it.