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

by dhw, Friday, January 11, 2019, 12:59 (9 days ago) @ David Turell

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

dhw: 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”!

DAVID: All I have ever said is the original DNA may have contained all the info for evolution. And minor adaptations within species may be done with guidelines by the species itself.

Then please reread your two comments at the head of this post. What do you mean by the “info”? What is the 3.8 byo programme for? First you said it only allowed for adaptations (i.e. not innovations), and then you said major speciation was “built into” the original DNA. What else could this mean other than a programme for every innovation from bacteria to humans, taking in every innovation for fish, birds, reptiles, mammals etc.? Your deletion alternative can only mean that the first cells contained DNA for all the bits and pieces I have listed, as now bolded.(For "guidelines" see below.)

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

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.

dhw: 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.

DAVID: A non-answer! The issue is the need for rapid-fire mutations to make hominins so quickly!

Right, nothing to do with chance and nothing to do with the size of the group – your initial objections. Now it is speed. I have summarized your explanation (divine dabbling, preprogramming or deletion). As you well know, my own hypothesis (as unproven as yours), is the perhaps God-given, autonomous ability of cells/cell communities to restructure themselves in order to improve their chances of survival when faced with new conditions.

dhw: 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.

DAVID: …you know fully well I support a mechanism with guidelines, semi-autonomous.

When questioned, you fall back on nebulous “guidelines” and semi-autonomy. If your God preprogrammed or dabbled the changes that led to speciation, do please tell us which half of the process was autonomous, i.e. was the independently intelligent decision-making of the organisms concerned.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum