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

by David Turell , Wednesday, April 14, 2021, 19:10 (1107 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: 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: Last week, you wrote that my theory did not answer “why the enlargement had to include a huge expansion of 200 cc in the mostly unused prefrontal and frontal conceptual areas”. I asked “how huge is huge?” and referred you to three websites which showed that the expansion was not huge, and I asked you to stop harping on about a huge leap. But on you went about size: “Your total dismissal of the huge 20% expansion from erectus….” And “You won’t admit it is over-expansion.” I asked you again to stop harping on about size. You wrote: “I’ll harp as much as I can. You have offered no real proof of your position about size while studiously ignoring function.” I replied, as I do now: “You keep dodging from size to function. I’ll deal with function later. My point here is that there is no huge leap in size.” You even accused me of fiddling the figures. We then moved on to function again.

Thanks for clarifying. Size is an issue but function is more important in the newly enlarged areas.

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.

DAVID: 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.

dhw: And so yet again you go back to size, and yet again you ignore my interpretation of history, which means that yet again I must repeat it. The initial expansion to 1350cc would have been the result of fulfilling a new requirement (e.g. new ideas, tools, weapons, environmental conditions, discoveries, social changes). From that moment on, 1350cc were all in use, and through complexification met all requirements (just like all their antecedents) until, perhaps 245,000 years later – peanuts compared to erectus’s 2 million years – more new requirements arose which previously would have required further expansion. But the brain did not expand (perhaps because further expansion might have caused anatomical problems), and so instead it enhanced its capacity for complexification. This proved so efficient that 150cc of cells which previously had been essential were no longer needed. Now please tell me why this makes no sense to you.

Size, complexity and new functions are all part of our discussion. The bold makes no sense to me. It doesn't explain at all the shrinkage of 150 cc later on in homo history and simply implies the brain was oversized for current use when sapiens appeared. Why would your supposed intelligent neurons make too many cells at first? They hoped complexification would get rid of the excess? I have presumed in this discussion your intelligent cells know how to think and design for the future. I know my God can. I view additional complexity provided better function over time as my God planned. As for your nonsense about anatomical enlargement of the skull, six ounces of brain expansion in the somewhat globular skull would hardly add to hat sizes. Neanderthals handled their bigger brain easily,.