Evolution: more genomic evidence of pre-planning (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, March 11, 2021, 09:20 (1113 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You make my case. Erectus led a simple life as did original sapiens. No need for big brain.

dhw: Erectus’s brain varied from 900cc to 1200cc – a range of 300 cc. Sapiens’ brain averages 1350 cc., an increase of 150 cc. I propose that all these increases would have been caused by new tools, ideas, discoveries etc. that required additional cells. Why do you think the invention of, for instance, a new tool or weapon would revolutionize the “simple” way of life? They needed the bigger brain to implement new ideas as an improvement to their still ”simple” way of life. A hunter with a new weapon is still a hunter.

DAVID: You have not described any major change in lifestyle between erectus and sapiens that would require sure a large brain expansion, compared to the way it is massively used today. God anticipated that use.

I have just said that there is no reason why the erectus and sapiens expansions should have changed the lifestyle: the hunter would still be a hunter. The massive use today of the existing brain has resulted in complexification, not expansion – presumably because the brain could not expand any more without major changes to the anatomy. And according to you, complexification is an autonomous process (no divine interference), so why shouldn’t he have made expansion an autonomous process too: cells add to their number or complexify as and when they need to – not before they need to?

dhw: Your only objection to this theory seems to be that we didn’t need our 1350cc brain for 300,000 years, but you can’t tell us why your God would have given it to us when we didn’t need it.

DAVID: Simple concept: God anticipates needs all through evolution. Flippers given to pre-whales so they can swim easily.

dhw: So do you think whales could have waited around for 300,000 years before they entered the water? That’s the argument you are using for the sapiens brain!

DAVID: Terrible comparison. a flipper has one use, a large brain very many.

You have completely missed the point. I am proposing that even if it were true that your God popped in to change legs to flippers, you would not have expected him to do so 300,000 years before the whale entered the water. So why would he pop in to expand the brain 300,000 years before the extra capacity was needed?

David’s theory of evolution

dhw: I do not “chop” evolution up into segments. I have it branching out into a vast bush, and 99% of the branches (including food supplies) did NOT lead to humans. And the obvious truth that past forms had no link to present forms should stop you once and for all from claiming that past forms were part of the goal to evolve present forms.

DAVID: Really? Didn't humans have to evolve from previous forms, which also had to evolve?

dhw: Yes, that’s the 1% we’re talking about. I asked you to stop restricting evolution to the one line from bacteria to humans (now bolded). And so you proceed to restrict evolution to the one line from bacteria to humans.

DAVID: Not so. Everything came from bacteria. I just selected us as an example.

I am not disputing evolution! You keep telling us that every other life form was “part of the goal of evolving humans”, although 99% of them had no connection with humans!

SURVIVAL

dhw: Please tell us what other purpose flippers serve if it is not to improve the chances of survival in a new environment.

DAVID: My view is God provides for future survival as He designs new forma.

dhw: If the purpose is future survival, it is clearly absurd to argue that the quest for survival plays no part in evolution. You simply have your God inventing means of survival in advance instead of organisms doing it themselves when needed. The purpose is still survival.

DAVID: God's purpose was to produce humans.

There you go again. God turned legs into flippers, and designed millions of life forms and their food supplies, lifestyles, strategies and natural wonders because he wanted to design humans, although 99% of them had no connection with humans. And adaptation to new conditions has nothing to do with the quest for survival. Please let’s put an end to this discussion. It is becoming more and more nonsensical. :-(

Playing possum

dhw: How do you think strategies originate and then survive? They have to start somewhere, and then they have to be passed on by example, communication, education (perhaps you didn’t know that parent animals teach their young) etc. Or do you think your God preprogrammed the first cells 3.8 billion years ago to pass on a design for possums plus their play-dead strategy, or does he keep popping in to give possums refresher courses?

DAVID: God had to teach them somehow.

You have only offered us these two methods, and I wonder how many even of your ID-ers, let alone the folk who have studied animal behaviour, would support the idea that animals, birds, insects etc. are incapable of making their own discoveries or designing their own survival strategies.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum