Back to David's theory of evolution: God's error corrections (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, August 30, 2020, 09:26 (1544 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: But you said it meant that “all future organism models might be present in the original DNA/genome.”... Perhaps you could explain what you meant by “models”?

DAVID: Codes for new parts. Not models.

dhw: Yes, I thought models might be a bit bulky for those poor little cells.... What a pity they didn’t also contain corrections for “errors” like cancer, but I guess you have to draw the line somewhere.

You left out my comment that the original cells must also have contained codes for legs, arms, plus every undabbled innovation, lifestyle etc. in the history of life. Single cells do indeed contain a miraculous amount of information, but codes for the whole of life's history minus the dabbles seems to me to be going a bit too far.

DAVID: The original DNA also contained an amazing editing system you keep ignoring, and then denigrating as really useless.

The subject and starting point of this thread is the errors that are not covered by the amazing editing system. If all you wanted to do was discuss the successes, there was no point in opening a thread about the errors. And the fact that I have focused on the disease-causing errors that initially caused you so much trouble (and incidentally provided you with your career) does not mean that I regard the body’s miraculous network of properly functioning cells as “really useless”. Please stop jumping to silly conclusions.

dhw: How can you possibly argue that your God turning legs into fins before pre-whales entered the water is more logical, more scientific and more of a fit with reality than legs adapting to life in the water and in due course turning into fins?

DAVID: You constantly forget the gaps between whale species fossils. Where are the itty-bitty modified forms to fit your suggestion?

We cannot expect to find a complete inch-by-inch fossil record of every modification in every species that has descended from earlier species. But the fact that we can observe how modern organisms adapt to new conditions, as opposed to changing before new conditions arise, suggests to me that legs adapting to life in the water is a more likely explanation for the evolution of fins than your God stepping in and doing an operation on a group of pre-whales before telling them to go swim.

DAVID (under “Immunity”): we use bacterial CRISPR enzyme to edit DNA, a perversion of its use in life, in which it is used to chop up enemy DNA's. But the real consideration is when does this type of immunity appear in relation to the origin of the organism? And it obviously has to be designed simultaneously into the first appearance of each new species.

dhw: Once again you are confusing yourself by conflating evolution and direct design. For those of us who believe in common descent, each new organism/species will have inherited characteristics and processes, including certain forms of immunity, from its ancestors. Immunity, in my view, has to be an on-going process as the cells react to new threats. The designer of the mechanism (I call it cellular intelligence) which works out solutions to new problems as they arise may be your God.

DAVID: I'm not confused by my approach to God designing a process that we interpret as evolution. It is your confusion about my beliefs, as usual.

You said that this form of immunity had to be designed simultaneously into the first appearance of each new species. I don’t see why. Do you disagree that new organisms will have inherited certain forms of immunity from their ancestors, and do you disagree that immunity is an on-going process as cells react to new threats?