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

by David Turell , Sunday, March 21, 2021, 14:41 (1131 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I'm not surprised you are not convinced. I've demonstrated God's likely purpose, but you don't accept God, so my point won't appeal to you.

dhw: My theory allows for God, and what I do not accept is the illogicality of your theory of brain expansion, which is that your God operated on various sets of hominins and homos to increase their brain capacity by approx 200 cc for no immediate purpose but solely in order that a couple of million years later, the size could reach 1350 ccs, still for no particular reason until 300,000 years later, suddenly the extra size came in useful. You can see no sign of any advance from the earliest tree-dwelling ancestor to the earliest homo sapiens.

The bold is a total distortion of my views. From before Lucy to latter erectus there were major changes in physiology, anatomy, and lifestyle.

dhw: And you cannot see any logic in the proposal that each expansion occurred (using a mechanism which your God may have designed for both complexification and expansion) to serve a specific purpose at the time, e.g. to create new tools, to cope with a new environment, to exploit a new discovery.

This is a non-answer to 'why so big so early'. Each expansion allows complexification in my theory and is not at issue. Only over-expansion is at issue

DAVID: A repeat of your position which simply doesn't accept the concept that God speciates and prepares them in advance of new needs. You are left with natural speciation which doesn't explain the new massive enlargement for small developments in lifestyle.

dhw: I do not accept the concept that God expands brains 200 ccs at a time for no reason other than for them to achieve nothing until a couple of million years and many species of hominin and homo later.

Gradual developments in brain uses occur in all new-sized brains

DAVID: You don't answer the issue as you have admitted recently the new demands were minimal.

dhw: I have “admitted” no such thing! The demands I have listed would all be major enough in their time to require additional brain cells. Your obsessive dislike of Darwin has led you to brush aside the fact that the PURPOSE of all the changes and advances would have been to improve each species’ chances of survival.

I don't dislike Darwin. but what his blind followers have done to his theory.

dhw: That never changed from one species to another. This means that there would have been few changes in lifestyle – the aim was always survival. And so, for example, the invention of the spear would have been a major advance, requiring additional brain capacity, but the hunter would have remained a hunter. Now please tell me what “issue” I have not answered.

The bold is your admission the bigger brain came with small changes in brain usage.

SURVIVAL

DAVID: Why do oversized brains suddenly appear creating the philosophic problem of stasis? As above, you describe stasis as we see it, but that doesn't explain the burst in size when not needed.

dhw: In my theory each “burst in size” IS needed! And this has nothing to do with stasis, which simply means that after the initial fulfilment of need there were no further needs. And this in turn has nothing to do with your attempt to avoid the obvious fact that any evolutionary changes that are made for the purpose of improving chances of survival confirm that the motive for the evolutionary changes is to improve chances of survival! Some of us would say that the motive for doing something is a driving force.

DAVID: Yes, those who do not recognize God would adopt that position.

dhw: According to your theory of evolution, your God was “driven” by one purpose: to design H. sapiens. For some reason which you can’t explain, he was “driven” to directly design millions of life forms etc. that had no connection with humans in order to fulfil the purpose that “drove” him into creating life, which was to create H. sapiens. If you want to play word games, we can carry on. But please don’t pretend that a purpose is not a driving force, whether the term applies to humans or to your God.

My God is never driven but extremely thoughtful and purposeful in the goals He sees as proper and worthwhile. Again you distort: I have no idea as to why God chose to evolve us, but that is what He did. You give lip-service to our specialness, and then denigrate its philosophical/theological import.