David's theory of evolution: James A. Shapiro's view (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, January 11, 2020, 12:01 (260 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: It is your so-called designing cell committees to which I object as a distortion of Shapiro's point of view.

dhw: You call them committees, and I call them communities. Do you deny that multicellular organisms consist of different cell communities? Please answer.

DAVID: They consist of organized organs, no more than to produce different products, under strict rules.

dhw: So do you deny that these organized organs consist of different cell communities?

DAVID: Silly. Of course not.

So stop this “silly” business of changing the word to “committees” and pretending that I am distorting Shapiro’s theory when he makes it crystal clear that he believes in cell communities (organisms) that design their own evolutionary novelties.

Dhw: Meanwhile, what hyperbole? Do you honestly think that his talk contradicts his theory? Look at the heading of the first section of the article:
1. Living Organisms Regularly Facilitate Their Own Evolution

DAVID: Bacteria!!! applied to multicellular is pure theory, and a great contribution to the problem of speciation, but no solution so far.

Yes, yes, his "natural genetic engineering" is a theory and not a fact. Now tell me, what “hyperbole”? He does not confine his theory to bacteria. His theory applies to all cells.

dhw: I asked you what hyperbole? Are you now telling us that Shapiro does not believe that cells are cognitive, sentient, decision-making beings which produce evolutionary novelty through a process of self-modification?

DAVID: Thank you for bringing up the hyperbole, for which there is no proof for multicellular. Bacteria (his research) are the only organisms like this. You and see Shapiro thoughg totally different prisms.

Same again. You said that he had dropped his “hyperbole” in his latest article. I asked what “hyperbole”, and back you go to your disbelief in his theory. Shapiro argues that cellular intelligence produces evolutionary novelty, i.e. organisms facilitate their own evolution. That is precisely the same as my own proposal.

dhw: Your claim that we have no evidence does not mean that Shapiro has changed his theory that natural genetic engineering arises from cells’ ability to modify themselves and hence to produce evolutionary novelty. If you have evidence that he has changed his mind, please produce it.

DAVID: I have different views of his statements which I fully accept. You stretch him to fit your desires.

You have not yet produced one single proposal of mine which “stretches” his theory. Please provide evidence that he has changed the theory summarized by all the quotes I have reproduced in previous posts, or do you want me to reproduce them again?

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum