Logic and evolution (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, July 27, 2016, 17:24 (3039 days ago) @ dhw

dhw:What would you say are the logical flaws in the hypothesis that your God might have created an autonomous mechanism that enables organisms to acquire and process new information with which to create the innovations that lead to speciation?-As I've noted before, perfectly logical if it is semiautomatic with limits set by God.-> 
> DAVID: No. I can imagine a recombination of genes made the branch leading to platypus, is not the recombination that lead to elephants. As with chimp and human, a simple population number says the DNAs in both are 98% of each other, but internal analysis of DNA arrangement and expression says we are 78% similar. This is how differentiation is made.
> 
> dhw: Of course the genetic combination is different. Any innovation will require a recombination/rearrangement of some sort, if only to accommodate all the new information. How does that mean that the LUCA contained all the information, internal and external, necessary for the platypus and elephant, and the platypus had to lose the elephant information in order to become a platypus?-Same repeat: the only advances we know are adaptations and many of them lose information. ?this is the ONLY evidence we have.
> 
> DAVID: The 3.8 billion years of info is your assumption, not mine. 
> dhw: Life is believed to have begun 3.8 billion years ago. If you claim that all the information was present at the beginning, then it was present 3.8 billion years ago. Just as information is information, the beginning is the beginning.-> DAVID: But what was implied, as you know, is that I also favor dabbling with info added.
> 
> dhw: The 3.8 billion years of info is your assumption, not mine, and if information has to be added by a dabble, it cannot all have been present at the beginning of evolution. Your different theories contradict each other, -Of course they contradict. I've always said one or the other, since there is no way of knowing at this point in our knowledge.