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

by David Turell @, Monday, April 12, 2021, 16:22 (1110 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Look at the dramatic new size of the frontal areas in only sapiens and Neanderthal. That is selective growth which is the real aspect of this discussion, and I've pointedly raised it before, while you blithely worry about the size of the size jump. Yes, erectus grew their brain, but not as selectively as sapiens had happen.

dhw: I thought your point was that your God had given us all these extra frontal lobe cells before we needed them, i.e. in anticipation of future needs. And my proposal is that we got them because we needed them at the time, and after that there was a period when the new size of the frontal lobe coped with all requirements until 245,000 years later it would not have been able to cope, but instead of expanding it enhanced its ability to complexify, and this proved so efficient that 150 cc of previously essential cells were no longer needed. As usual, you have totally ignored this proposal. Here is an interesting website on the frontal lobe that also lays emphasis on complexification:

Frontal Lobe - Physiopedia

www.physio-pedia.com/Frontal_Lobe

QUOTE: For many years, many scientists thought that the frontal lobe was comparatively larger in humans than in other primates. They thought that this was an important feature of human evolution and was the main reason why human cognition is different from that of the other primates. This view has been challenged by research. Magnetic resonance imaging was used to find the volume of the frontal cortex in humans, all living ape species and several monkey species. The human frontal cortex is not relatively larger than the cortex in the other great apes, but it is relatively larger than the frontal cortex in the lesser apes and the monkeys[5]. However, what sets us apart from other mammals is not so much brain size but reorganization of our brains in terms of connectivity and neurotransmitter changes.
Your comments, please.

The bold is the key. Volume is not as important as organization of neuronal networks but also how the frontal lobes are differently organized by region:

https://carta.anthropogeny.org/moca/topics/frontal-lobe-size

The frontal lobe is defined as the portion of the brain anterior to the central sulcus. Absolutely, the size of the human frontal lobe is approximately 3-4 times that of great apes; however, information to date suggests that evolutionary increase in the relative size of the entire frontal lobe does not distinguish humans from apes. The frontal lobe does not show disproportionate volumetric increase in humans relative to great apes (Semendeferi and Damasio, 2000). Proportinately, the human frontal lobe occupies approximately 35-38.5% of the cerebral hemispheres, which does not fall discretely outside of the ranges found in all great ape species. (my bold)

Note my bold. Again it is organization of regions, not simple volume. Elephant brains are larger overall.


dhw:[referring to hippocampus expansion): Yes, our existing cells can presumably complexify sufficiently to implement our immaterial concepts, but more cells were needed to accommodate memory. Now please explain why you continue to ignore the fact that we know the brain RESPONDS to new ideas by complexifying or, in one case, expanding. Why do you find it impossible to believe that past brains responded in the same way?

DAVID: They did expand under God's designs. The hippocampus has a special design for increasing memory capacity, while enough cells were given in the very enlarged frontal lobes to satisfy all future needs with less cells under complexification. Erectus did not have that frontal enlargement.

dhw: Every enlargement from preceding brains would have had a cause, but we don’t know what the causes were. That’s evolution for you. Thank you for confirming that the initial enlargement of the frontal lobes was adequate and clearly new requirements were met by enhanced complexification which was so efficient that certain cells became redundant. Only the hippocampus needed to expand. Now please explain why you continue to ignore the fact that we know the brain RESPONDS to new ideas by complexifying or, in one case, expanding. Why do you find it impossible to believe that past brains responded in the same way?

Stated many times: Without a God your ideas are reasonable. But I have God.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum