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

by David Turell @, Monday, February 10, 2020, 18:46 (7 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Monday, February 10, 2020, 19:10

dhw: […] the question remains: how could he [God] have programmed them to adapt/innovate if he did not know the future environmental conditions that would require or allow the adaptations and innovations?

DAVID: He did know. The dinosaurs are a major clue. I think He threw Chixculub knowing the dinos were not prepared to handle it. [dhw: to handle what?] […] I'm sure He worked with overall environmental changes and dappled as necessary.

dhw: “Worked with” does not answer my question. How could he have known about all the environmental changes for which you claim he PREPROGRAMMED the first cells 3.8 billion years ago? Dabbling suggests an on-going process of direct intervention in the environment (Chicxulub) or response to - you say anticipation of - environmental changes not programmed 3.8 billion years ago. Both suggest that he did not know everything from the start, i.e. he was learning and acting as he went along. And why should that not be the case?

The dinos could not handle the major environmental worldwide changes. God knew all the major general environmental events: ice ages, appearance of oxygen, asteroid strikes if major, as He evolved Earth for life's arrival and thereafter. I'm trying to get you to recognize every minor tornado or flood is a result of his activity, but is beneath His advanced notice. Your approach humanizes him, as usual.

dhw: For the nth time, my theory if true DOES explain the gaps (intelligent minds can innovate), and you have agree that your God may well have human characteristics, so your “humanizing” is irrelevant to my alternatives.

You are simply entering a designing mind at the level of cells!!! Woolly theory, no more.

dhw: If you were able to live in all the environments bacteria have learned to live in without any equipment other than your biological self, you would be the superman of all supermen. The requirements are as many as the environments in which bacteria live.

DAVID: No they are not. All needed is temperature adaption and finding metabolism for energy supply.

dhw: You might as well say they only need to survive! Are you really telling me that a few simple instructions will cover every single environment, food source and new threat (e.g. medicine) in life's history? While for all our ingenuity, we humans still can't find a way to wipe the baddies out! But one mechanism would enable them to conquer all: intelligence – as proposed by the specialist Shapiro.

What Shapiro observed was bacteria have the ability to edit DNA, nothing more, as a reaction to changed stimuli. They were created knowing they needed that ability to b e free living organisms.

DAVID: The problem is the extraordinary theory that germ cells can make designs for future needs or even can make major changes in a new environment (your theory).

dhw: I do not specify which cells do the thinking (germ cells pass on the new forms), and I keep repeating that MY THEORY DOES NOT DEMAND FUTURE PLANNING. Yes, the theory is that intelligent cell communities can make major changes in a new environment. At least you’ve got that right.

DAVID: The adaptations you keep referring to are major, not minor. The gaps show no evidence of gradual changes. Why don't you recognize Gould's prime worry? Giant changes require a designing mind.

dhw: Yes, the only adaptations we KNOW of are minor, but from that we can extrapolate the possibility that the same mechanism may be capable of major changes, and that would explain the gaps. This THEORY, which seeks to explain speciation and the gaps, extrapolates from a known process. Has anyone ever seen your God dabbling or found the 3.8-billion-year-old programme for speciation etc.?

Of course not, as you know. As for the need for a designer your quote today fits: "This is a prime example of the case for design and a designer." And then you as usual run to simple cells to do the job. Not capable, just wishful theorizing. The mechanism is what bacteria have to be able to do. The complex advanced organisms need for change evolve across large gaps in form and function as we see across the gaps in the fossil record. The sudden appearance of the multitude of Cambrian animals is a complete refutation of your theory. These animals appeared without the appropriate precursors. Your theory describes changes in precursors and requires precursors. I await your thoughts!

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum