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

by David Turell , Tuesday, April 13, 2021, 15:20 (1109 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: 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.

dhw: Precisely. Connectivity, neurotransmitter changes, organization of neuronal networks can all be summed up as complexification. So do please stop harping on about brain size and overexpansion. Your next quote seems to me irrelevant as well as being sheer muddle:

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 bb; 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. (DAVID’s bold)

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

dhw: What is there to note? Our frontal lobe is 3-4 bigger than that of great apes, but the relative size does not distinguish us from apes! Confused? Nothing there about organization of regions, but yes, I agree with you, and am pleased to see that you have dropped your focus on size. All the regions would presumably have expanded in earlier times, according to needs (we can’t simply ignore the fact that ALL brains have expanded), but the crucial factor for sapiens’ brain has been its enhanced ability to complexify – see the bold in my quote above.

I discussed organization and complexity in the recent past as the major differences, not the volume. I wish I knew where. From memory your responses did not seem to lead us to this present discussion.

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

dhw: Stated many times: my proposal includes the possibility that your God designed the whole system. It is therefore ”reasonable” to propose that the system itself works through the intelligence of cells that have the ability to RESPOND to new ideas. conditions etc. by either expanding or complexifying. Nothing is proven, but I would suggest that our knowledge of how the modern brain works makes this theory considerably more likely than the theory that your God kept expanding brains for no particular reason other than to prepare them for ideas and conditions which might arise in the future.

The bold makes no sense. Our highly used brain shrank 150 cc while complexifying. It was enlarged far in advance of its current use, that is history you distort.