Innovation and Speciation: aquatic mammals avoid bends (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, December 01, 2020, 19:53 (1243 days ago) @ dhw

Dolphins
dhw: This decision is easy to explain: because local conditions meant marine life gave a better chance of survival. Fins for legs and reduced heart rate did the same. Cell communities adapt to requirements – regardless of whether your God pops in to operate on them, or they do it through the intelligence he gave them.

DAVID: Enormous changes from cell intelligence, with no mind is pie in the sky.

dhw: Cellular intelligence would come from a mind different to ours. I suspect there are many scientists who would say that an unknown, sourceless “mind” stepping in to operate on the legs of pre-whales and pre-dolphins before they enter the water is “pie in the sky”.

Now you refer to atheists as an answer.

Denton
dhw: ...please don’t pretend that only humans are “unexpected” descendants from bacteria!

DAVID: That is a basic tenet of my thoughts, along with Adler. Darwin's theory has never been able to explain our appearance from the point of view of necessary survivability. Our ape cousins prove the point.

dhw: Since bacteria have survived, NO multicellular organism was “necessary”. But multicellular organisms may have improved their chances of survival when and where conditions were proving difficult. This applies to all species, including humans. (In other locations, apes may have had no problem. Or there were too many apes, or one group was more adventurous than another. Plenty of possibilities.)

DAVID: But to relying on survivability ,which is an unproven theory.

dhw: There are NO proven theories! Why do you find my explanation unreasonable?

Mammals to water is a complication, requiring an enormous change in physiological mechanisms. This does not seem to tell us survival was a issue. You've skipped around the issue that humans were never required, and their appearance is a powerful argument for God as Adler shows.

Fish to land
dhw: Why your God should have preprogrammed or dabbled every individual muscle-brain-skull arrangement for every individual species when, according to you, all he wanted was us and our food supply, remains a mystery for you to solve.

DAVID: I can't solve the mystery of God's choices of mechanisms of creation. He created but He is not explaining.

dhw: You can’t explain YOUR choice of God’s mechanisms [preprogramming or dabbling every life form, natural wonder etc.] and purposes. And you prefer to turn a blind eye to alternative choices and explanations, even if they are logical.

DAVID: I'm not blind, just very logical.

dhw: Turning a blind eye means not wanting to see – it does not mean unable to see. I find it difficult to accept as logical a theory for which you can find no logical explanation!

I accept what God chose to do. I don't need to know His reasons. Your logical explanations are following a basic establishment of a very human god.

Genome complexity
Quote: "In general, cells use similar working mechanisms from a common ancestor. They all learned the same tricks as long as these tricks were useful.'"

dhw: A nice way of summing up the way evolution works: cells use the mechanisms in order to devise and hand on new tricks.

DAVID: All it shows is common descent, which we both accept, and I think designed by God.

dhw: It proposes that cells use mechanisms and learn tricks. Just pointing out yet more support for Shapiro's/my theory.

DAVID: Cells tricks are quite simple and automatic.

dhw: I’m referring to those that are complex and require intelligence.

Even Shapiro doesn't go that far. All He has found is bacteria can edit DNA, and stay the same species.