How children pick up a language: new review of Wolfe (Humans)

by David Turell , Wednesday, November 16, 2016, 20:04 (2927 days ago) @ dhw

dhw:I use the terms “coping with” to indicate adaptation, and “exploiting” to indicate innovation. NOBODY knows how speciation took place, but we know that adaptation happens, and I am suggesting that the same mechanism works for both.

You've said in the past that Darwin theory does not explain speciation, but your statement says Darwin does explain it! Speciation involves large changes in organisms, not adaptations but large innovations.

dhw: You don’t need math to tell you that any new species needs at least two to tango. “Starting numbers” does not mean large numbers.
DAVID: I understand that. Just a small number of surviving males and females with matched DNA will do.

dhw: Thank you. Goodbye to the red herring of large numbers.

I never said very large numbers, just more than two.

DAVID: Cell division means that what is present is passed onto daughter cells, unless an error is made. Modifications of DNA occur between cell division.

dhw: How does that support the hypothesis that the first cells contained and passed on millions and millions of programmes?

Quite clear. Since cell division is straight replication of DNA, not changed by sex reproduction, it all could be present from the beginning and unchanged except by error copies, which are rare.

DAVID: There is not enough time for the dominant recessive gene play to work according to the math folks and evolution math folks. One new program is modification and I'm theorizing about speciation.

dhw: If you believe in common descent, both adaptation and innovation entail modifications in existing organisms, but innovations bring something new, whereas adaptations enable the organism to remain itself. There may not be enough time for chance to create speciation, but if God’s programmes can do it, so can intelligent organisms. The only rational objection you have raised so far to my hypothesis is that, although some experts believe in cellular intelligence, nobody has yet come up with evidence that cell communities are intelligent enough to do the inventing. Fair enough. And similarly, nobody has yet come up with evidence that chance can do the inventing, or that God preprogrammed the first cells with every innovation and natural wonder, or God dabbled. We are all theorizing.

Of course we are theorizing. But logically since the massive complexity requires complex planning. Non-mental somatic cells don't have much planning ability except minor modification, which is proven.