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

by dhw, Monday, March 29, 2021, 13:53 (1333 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: If you think shrinkage proves your case, please explain why your God designed all the extra cells and gave sapiens 300,000 years to learn to use them before jettisoning them as redundant.

Not answered.

DAVID: Stasis proves the brain was too big for current requirements, as you point out it took 300,000 years to fully use it.

Stasis proves that there were no new requirements or developments, and it is you who insist that the brain was TOO big and it took 300,000 years to “fully use it”. Your next comment supports my theory:

DAVID: And the import of shrinkage is opposite to your convoluted reasoning. Overall size is not the issue but the ability to reorganize as needed as new uses of a big brain are employed.

Correct. Size is not the issue. The initial expansion to sapiens size provided the number of cells needed for EXISTING requirements. Minor new requirements would have been accomplished by complexification, but when there were major new requirements and because the brain could not expand any more, the “issue” became the ability to reorganize (= enhanced complexification). In other words, there were never too many cells, but the existing cells had to respond to new uses by enhanced complexification and not by adding to their number. This process proved so efficient that some cells became redundant (= shrinkage).

dhw: […] the only brain we can study shows that the brain changes IN RESPONSE to new requirements and not in anticipation of them…

As with the first point in this post, not answered. And you have not answered the question of how sapiens “learned to use” his brain for 300,000 years by producing nothing. Instead you digressed to this:

DAVID: ….if you even slightly try to acknowledge my point, God suddenly appears as design agent, and you can't go there.

dhw: My point is that just as you believe he designed an autonomous process of complexification – unless you’ve suddenly decided that God also designs all our human designs for us – he could (theistic version) have enabled the SAME autonomous mechanism to produce additional cells when needed. I simply have your designer God going where you don’t want him to go.

You returned to our subject under “Language learning”, and perhaps the repetitions will eventually lead to you answering my objections to your theory.

DAVID: I assume a degree of complexification occurred […] Let us note this ability was present 315,000 year ago and unused until complex language appeared about 70,000 estimated years ago.

How on earth do you know that an ability was present but was never used? I agree with your assumption. Once the brain had reached its maximum size 315,000 years ago, any further requirements would have resulted in a “degree of complexification”, as is illustrated by the fact that nowadays any new requirement is met by complexification (e.g. the illiterate women learning to read).

DAVID: It is obvious we humans didn't know how to use our very supple brain until we finally tried it out to its full extent. The stasis must be viewed as a required experimental learning period. The shrinkage from complexification obviously means it was oversized from the beginning. All in anticipation of future usage. dhw has never given a reasonable explanation of the oversized beginning to more than match the current needs use at the time of the initial appearance of this sapiens brain.

You have now excluded all former expansions from this discussion! Erectus went from 900cc to 1200 cc, and we upped it to 1350 cc. Each successive species would have used its capacity and its powers of complexification to its fullest extent, matching current needs, and then new requirements required expansion. But as sapiens’ brain could not expand any more, “a degree of complexification occurred”, i.e. the size was adequate, and not excessive. It was the enhanced ability to reorganize that was needed. So your God (if he exists) did not give us too many cells to begin with, but he may well have given all cells (ancient and modern) the autonomous ability to complexify and also to add to their numbers when needed. In sapiens’ case, the improved usage of the complexification mechanism was so great that certain cells became redundant (shrinkage). Now perhaps you will respond to my earlier queries about your own theory.

dhw: I note that under “survival” you have now dropped your objection to Darwin’s theory that the purpose of evolutionary adaptations and innovations was to improve chances of survival. No doubt this will come up again in future posts.

DAVID: Of course adaptations improve survival. God gave organisms the ability to make minor adaptations to respond to changing requirements. Darwin saw speciation as a survival mechanism and I see God as the designer of new species.

There is no contradiction between the two theories. Even if your God designed all the innovations which led to new species, the purpose of those innovations was to improve chances of survival.