Making new evolutionary innovations (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Sunday, December 01, 2019, 15:39 (10 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: You are trying to conflate two issues. You do not accept that cells have the intelligence to do their own designing. This has nothing whatsoever to do with communication, because they would use exactly the same means of communicating innovative “thoughts” as they use to communicate adaptive “thoughts” and the “thoughts” required for their everyday work. This is a non-discussion.

DAVID: No, I'm not conflating. We only know how cells communicate during daily work. You suppose another line of design communication that has no current evidence. I prefer to work with theory from existing evidence.

dhw: What on earth is design communication? All organisms have their own means of communication. Cells communicate through chemical signals. Whether they communicate everyday tasks, adaptive tasks or innovative tasks, they will still communicate through chemical signals. But you do not believe they are capable of innovative tasks. A non-discussion which we should end.

DAVID: We agree that cells communicate chemically in their everyday tasks. Those simple signals are go or no go. 'Design communication' is what is required in exchanging design concepts, something that requires a designing mind or minds ( like at Volvo), not extrapolation of poor Shapiro's theoretical extensions of his bacterial research.

dhw: You do not believe that cells are capable of designing innovations because you do not believe that they have designing minds. That is the nub of the matter. If they do have designing minds, they must use the same chemical means of communication as they use in performing their everyday tasks and their adaptations. I don’t know why the Shapiro you praised so highly in your book is now “poor” Shapiro, and I don’t know why you have gone back to pretending that he knows nothing about cellular behaviour, when you have acknowledged the research he has called upon. This discussion is becoming sillier and sillier.:-(

Shapiro did fabulous work. He is a wonderful scientist. You have made him 'poor' by what I think is misusing his theories , and you haven't read the book, only reviews. He also published some lay articles which l have read, if I remember correctly the Atlantic, but no one else has picked his approach up and run with it that I can find. From his work we only know free-living bacteria can manipulate their genome, but after that all we have is possible unproven theory. We do know that in multicellular organisms, stem cells adjust DNA to make many different functioning styles of cells with different jobs. This is an exact replica of what bacteria do and therefore they are a forerunner of that stem cell ability! And that may be all that Shapiro has shown. That is not in any way the solution to the problem of speciation.:-)


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum