Different in degree or kind: our hands (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, March 18, 2016, 16:22 (3172 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: The minor modifications that appear now are not equal to the major jumps, punctuated equilibrium or saltations that have been the major contributors to evolution in the past. -dhw: That is why I distinguish between adaptation and innovation.-DAVID: Those are still unexplained unless God is invoked.-dhw: Invoking God is simply saying that some unknown intelligence caused innovations in an unknown way. Still a fair amount of explaining to do!-DAVID: Species appear fully formed, saltations similarly. Denton proposes structuralism with some sort of internal rearrangement mechanism to explain. I use God, but you are correct, no direct proof of why or how. But it is the only method of advancement of complexity on the record. Adaptation is just minor variation, not an explanation.-I know what adaptation is! We are trying to find an explanation for innovation, and “some sort of rearrangement mechanism” is the crux of the whole debate. You use a 3.8-billion-year computer programme for every rearrangement, lifestyle and natural wonder. Darwin uses random mutations. I propose the intelligence of cells/cell communities. There is no "direct proof" of any of the explanations, which is why the debate goes on.
 
DAVID: With your objection in mind, I've written two books with all the reasons for God, not just His role in evolution. Look at the totality of the arguments.-I do. And much as I admire your books, the totality of the arguments is precisely why I am an agnostic and not a theist or an atheist. However, this particular discussion concerns how evolution works, and my hypothesis does not exclude your God; it only opposes your hypothesis about how God organized evolution.