Evolution: a different view with loss of DNA segments (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, January 10, 2019, 13:26 (159 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: […] the 3.8 byo program allows the organisms to modify their DNA only for adaptations.

dhw: […] are you telling us that your God programmed nothing but minor adaptations…and dabbled every single major innovation?

DAVID: My view is still that God creates major speciation by one method or another, either having it built into the original 3.8 byo DNA with coded changes or perhaps by deletion as Behe is saying. I've viewed dabbles as wolf/dog changes which humans did in this case, but God did it before humans stepped into the process.

Even more confusing. You now have dabbles for adaptations, whereas in your original comment above, it was the 3.8 byo programme that only allowed for adaptations, and now the 3.8 byo programme apparently contains every single major change from bacteria through to humans, or alternatively the first cells contained DNA for eyes, ears, teeth, sexual organs, spikes, fins, legs, trunks, human pelvises, whale pelvises etc., and just discarded all these as needed, or rather as not needed. And you call my own hypothesis a “monstrous extrapolation”!

dhw: Why do you need a large group to make large mutations?

DAVID: The point is simple: if mutations cause speciation and have to occur by chance (BOLD), a small of group of hominins with a new generation every 18-20 years is extremely unlikely to have produced the body form and brain changes in the short geological time we know happened. (dhw’s bold)

dhw: Why do you keep harping on about chance? We have long since agreed that it was not by chance. ...I propose that local conditions led to a small group descending from the trees (no need for their brothers and sisters to change) and life on the ground triggered the changes made by their intelligent cell communities to enable them [to cope with the new environment – somehow this was omitted from my post]. Nothing to do with chance, and nothing to do with the size of the group, although once more: neither of these hypotheses have been proved.

DAVID: It has everything to do with the size of the group. From ape to erectus in two-three million years ( a moment in the grand scheme of 3.8 billion) means rapid fire mutations, all working together for the advance. I'm not arguing about chance. I'm claiming only deliberate design fits, and not by brainless cell committees.

See my bold above for chance, and this still has nothing to do with the size of the group. You are not just claiming “only deliberate design fits” – you have put forward a very specific, though somewhat confusing theory of design outlined above: divine dabbles (originally the 3.8 byo programme) for minor changes, preprogramming or deletion for major changes.

Dhw: One of the problems in our exchanges is that sometimes you say one thing and then later say the opposite. That is why we need these constant clarifications. Under “Genome complexity”, 3 January at 19.03: The question is…whether your God’s “information/instructions used by the cell” means a specific, 3.8 billion-year-old programme for every single change in the history of evolution […] or a mechanism which enables the cell to change itself autonomously…

DAVID: The only issue here is I believe God gave the cells that mechanism.

dhw: What mechanism were you referring to?

DAVID: 'That mechanism' is Shapiro's result. Cells can modify their DNA for minor adaptions to changes in requirements or stimuli. But they are still the same cells. What is not clear?

If you believe your God gave the cells the mechanism which enables the cell to change itself autonomously, you accept the autonomous mechanism! But you don’t, so let’s just forget what you wrote.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum