Explaining natural wonders (Animals)

by dhw, Wednesday, September 21, 2016, 12:56 (940 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You have admitted life is complex, but your statement above glosses over the issue of inventing new biochemistry for the adaptations you say happens as, 'organisms respond inventively to environmental change'. Any advance requires new proteins among millions of possibilities, plus coordinated complexes of old proteins. So far DNA or the whole genome does not seem to contain a way to do that.

dhw: I have not glossed over it. I have pointed out that nobody knows how the mechanism works. You have merely provided details of what nobody knows. The same objection applies to your claim that your God provided the first cells with a computer programme which over the course of 3.7 billion years has invented new biochemistry, chosen new proteins and coordinated complexes of old proteins. So far nobody has discovered God's computer programme. Nor has anybody sussed out how or indeed why your God personally intervened in order to create all these innovations and natural wonders extant and extinct (when all he wanted to do was produce humans).

DAVID: And my point persists; not knowing how speciation occurs, it still must be recognized that an advance in complexity involves finding new functional protein molecules. To me this requires a planning mind behind the process, since the search landscape is so huge. Found by chance, no way!

As usual, when confronted by the unlikelihood of your own hypothesis, you scurry away to the safety of attacking the chance hypothesis. The point of the cellular (perhaps God-given) intelligence hypothesis is that it does NOT rely on chance. It relies on intelligence.

Your two entries under “Genome complexity” follow the same track:

Comment: As noted previously the 3-D relationships in DNA affect gene expression and control. Where a gene is located is part of its function. How did Darwin style chance evolution arrange for that? The complexities in the genome function I have presented are beyond the capacity of a Darwin style evolutionary process. (My bold)

Comment: Methylation is an active modification process, but as we always see in genetic controls, a mechanism is present to turn on but also to turn off. In the Darwinian chance form of evolution one would wonder if both parts of the controls develop together. Seem unlikely in a hunt and peck system. (My bold)

If we substitute intelligent cell communities cooperating to produce increasingly complex mechanisms, we remove chance from the hypothesis.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum