Bacterial motors carefully studied (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, April 04, 2016, 16:41 (3155 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: If I understand BBella correctly, each organism can call on the knowledge and experience gained by its predecessors. Remember, we are dealing here with Chapter 2 in the history of life.
DAVID: I know her point. At issue is her inference that animals can make adaptations, epigenetics, and I agree. -According to her post, BBella's point and mine is that the weaverbird has the intelligence to build its own nest. You disagree: you say God had to guide it. -DAVID: But what we see in evolution is large gaps between phenotypes as animal series develop (whale as example). This requires new protein molecules acting in their specific ways, with prior knowledge of their functionalities not labeled on the molecules. Thus the landscape probability issue.-I have always distinguished between adaptations and innovations (= large gaps). NOBODY knows how the latter took place. Your theory is that God did it but you don't know how (maybe preprogramming, maybe dabbling). My proposal is that the cell communities did it, and your God may have given them the ability to do it autonomously. But I can understand why you prefer to duck away from the weaverbird issue by concentrating on the far greater complexity of molecules.
 
dhw: If you believe in common descent, all innovations have to take place within existing organisms. They are not looking out onto an endless landscape, but make internal adjustments to an already functioning mechanism that needs to adapt or has the opportunity to improve.
DAVID: Directly opposite to my comment above. You are discussing epigenetics, not the gaps.-Innovations must also take place within existing organisms if you accept common descent, and I am offering a hypothesis to explain the hitherto unexplained gaps/saltations/innovations.-DAVID: I loved the video, but don't you realize it was put-up job? The badger is bright, but his tools for escape were obviously provided. -Yes of course the tools were provided. The whole point is that the badger has the intelligence to work out how to use whatever materials are available. And the same formula may apply to other organisms using whatever materials are available in order to adapt and innovate. 
 
dhw: It may well be that we can get no further than this, since David can't believe that organisms are intelligent enough to work out improvements, or that his God is capable of giving them such intelligence without their having to be “guided” by him.
DAVID: You are still thinking at the gradual epigenetic level, not the major gaps of evolution.-No, you are the one who insists on sticking at the gradual epigenetic level, because you are not prepared to consider the possibility that your God gave organisms the autonomous ability to innovate as well as to adapt. I include the weaverbird's nest, the monarch's lifestyle, the wasp's egg-laying etc. in the category of innovations.