Evolution of Language (General)

by David Turell @, Thursday, October 31, 2019, 19:10 (1633 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: […] This shows what can be present before its use by God's design of evolution.

dhw: No it doesn't. Your authors explicitly (and perfectly logically) allow for the possibility that moths used their ears before bats came on the scene, to detect a wide range of sound frequencies to help them in their nocturnal way of life, and then they adapted their “ears” to combat the new threat.

DAVID: And what provided an original species of moths and later bats with ears at the start? Assuming needed ears requires anticipatory design, doesn't it?

dhw: You were trying to prove that moth ears were invented before they were needed for the fight against bats. The article shows quite clearly that they had other uses and were then adapted to meet the new demands. So now you switch the argument to the origin of ears. Nobody can possibly know the circumstances in which every new organ, lifestyle and natural wonder first came into existence. The article itself is naturally vague on the subject: “Moth hearing organs arose multiple times...” (my bold).

You are still with Darwin-think, as the author's are. The designer recognized ears would be useful if flying in the dark. Who new when moths would fly before the appearance of the moths? The design requires recognition of the future for the moth's style of living.


DAVID: I asked above, how did speciating cell committees know ears would be needed when the new organisms arrived on the scene? Requires analysis of future needs, which Darwin-thinking folks consider magically happening, like Margulis. You are still full Darwin, and don't recognize the problem.

dhw: They didn’t know ears would be needed! New species/organisms would be the RESULT of their immediate ancestors RESPONDING to new conditions! Common descent means that new organisms descend from earlier organisms. So an earlier organism for reasons unknown began to hunt by night, just as a pre-whale began to hunt in the water. A change of environment requires a change in the anatomy. Ability to hear becomes more important than ability to see, just as ability to swim becomes more important than ability to walk. There is no “analysis of future needs”. The analysis concerns how best to meet present needs (hunting in the dark, or swimming in the water). There is no “magic”. We know for a fact that cell communities cooperate and are able to adapt to changing conditions. What we don’t know is the extent to which they are able to innovate – although the borderline between adaptation and innovation is not clear. I have always accepted that this ability may have been designed by your God, but the “magic” jibe is far better directed at your own theory: the unknown being called God forecast the future, and somehow provided programmes for every future undabbled organ and strategy etc., to be magically passed down and then switched on in advance of every future change in the environment over billions of years to come. But “you don’t recognize the problem.”

Typical Darwin think. It doesn't explain the gaps before new well-designed competent species appear. Even Gould recognized they appeared with no itty-bitty steps and invented punc-inc to gloss over the problem. David Berlinski describes Darwin theory as 'smudge evolution', things morphing into each new step in tiny hardly noticeable steps.


Under “Bacterial gut role”:
QUOTE: "The human gut is rife with bacteria. Feces contains about 100 billion bacterial cells per gram, and gut bacteria outnumber human cells 10 to 1. These microbes, collectively called the gut microbiome, take on all sorts of maintenance-type work, Mougous says. They digest food, keep the gut's surface intact, provide vitamins, and kick bad bacteria out.""

DAVID: Bacteria have been around ever since life started. Previous articles and this one show the important roles they still play. Start life and continue to help it.

dhw: You could hardly have a better example of cooperation. Here we have single cells – bacteria – all busily combining into communities fulfilling different roles within the great big community of communities that make up the single organism. We are not even conscious of the fact that they’re there, let alone of what they are doing for us. And what they do for us is what keeps them alive. But you like to sneer at Margulis, who emphasized the role of cooperation in evolution and was a firm believer in cellular intelligence.

A good stretch of Margulis' view of related cells. Bacteria help us but they are not us.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum