More Denton: My review of my reading so far (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, February 29, 2016, 13:44 (3190 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Denton is an agnostic who believes in common descent. However he feels Darwin has no answer for how it works. The evidence is primarily the fact that there is no evidence for gradualism. The record is all saltation and punctuated equilibrium. So he has turned to an old theory of structuralism which preceded Darwin. Nature by some rules or laws provides for initial structures which then can change under 'constraints;' within the organisms. This fits my approach of discussing patterns and the IM becomes a controlled inventor. In contrast he views Darwin as functionalism, where natural selection is the final arbiter of what is presented as organisms respond to environmental challenges. Functional adaptation.-First of all, I'd like to express my admiration at your dedication in reading such books, and my gratitude for sharing what you learn. I don't know how you find the time and the patience!
 
Anyone who has followed our discussions over the last eight years will know that as far as you and I are concerned, gradualism has long since been a dead duck, and natural selection creates nothing, but simply ensures that useful changes will survive. However, we must distinguish between “functional adaptation” and innovation, which is why the response to environmental challenges may come in two forms: adaptation leaves the organism basically the same (surviving the challenge), whereas innovation changes the organism (possibly as a result of exploiting opportunities offered by the environment). Evolution depends on innovation, not adaptation.-DAVID: ....He interprets evo-devo as showing internal controls or constraints on all changes. He concludes the chapter 5 by stating: 'the tree of life and the taxa which forms its branches are pre-ordained into the order of things, part of the fine-tuning of the cosmos for life as manifested on Earth.' No wonder ID'ers and I side with him. BUT, so far he offers no mechanism as to how this works. Evolution is discontinuous, but he admits not knowing how saltations work: 'jumps' or 'actualizations'.-Of course there are constraints imposed by both internal and external factors, but “pre-ordained into the order of things”, and “nature by some rules or laws provides...” is as nebulous an explanation as you can get. However, you say “so far he offers no mechanism...” and one lives in hope that he will come up with something more concrete. Frankly, if he accepts common descent and wants to discount a preprogramming or dabbling God AND Darwin's random mutations plus gradualism, I see no other possible solution than an autonomous inventive mechanism within organisms themselves.-DAVID: One weird event among many tends to undo Darwin. There are two positions for gut and nerve cord. The arthropods' gut is dorsal and the nerve cord ventral. In vertebrates the spinal cord is dorsal and the gut is ventral. From a common ancestor?? By gradual steps?? But we know this happened.-We know that all innovations happened, and you, he and I reject the theory of gradual steps through random mutations. That leaves the alternatives listed above, plus separate creation. If I were Denton...well, no, let's wait and see what he comes up with.