Genome complexity: variation within species (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, December 15, 2016, 16:47 (2901 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: No question that individuals are different: that has been at the very core of my evolutionary hypothesis – that each adaptation and innovation must take place in individuals, and this means that there is no overall programme, but both processes depend on the ”intelligence” of the individual.
DAVID: With variation and with alternative pathways, the adaptations may be relatively automatic, relatively if partially resistant organisms have to have several generations to arrive at complete resistance.

A nice bit of Darwinian itty-bitty improvement. Do partially resistant organisms just die more slowly? I don’t understand what you mean by “relatively automatic”. The expression has nothing to do with a gradually improved resistance. Either the process is completely automatic or organisms take decisions of their own.

dhw: The argument that alternative pathways are “built into” some organisms (though not into others) simply boils down to saying that whenever a problem is solved, that proves there is a solution, and so the potential solution existed before the problem arose. The same would apply to inventions. If something new can be created, the potential for the something new was already there. If you wish to adopt that approach, I would argue that it requires intelligence to find the solution/realize the potential.
DAVID: Shifting to an alternative pathway can easily be automatic, not intelligent.

And it can easily be intelligent and not automatic. 50/50. But see below.

dhw: … if you insist that bacteria are programmed to find the right pathway (since you believe they are automatons), what alternative do you have to the claim that your God must have preprogrammed the first cells to pass on solutions to every single problem that bacteria might encounter throughout the history of life?DAVID: Generally no alternative except dabbling which we have discussed.

Thank you. That is the nub of the matter. According to you, the first cells contained and passed on programmes for millions of solutions for bacteria, millions of innovations, millions of lifestyles and natural wonders. The only alternative is God intervening every time bacteria have a problem. Your article on killifish raises the same issue: your God provided the first cells with all the different pathways necessary for the killifish to resist pollutants (but to hell with those species that perish) – or each time he sees the killifish under threat, he steps in. I wonder why the killifish is so much more important to God than the fish that perish. Impossible for humans to exist without killifish?