Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Friday, May 07, 2021, 12:53 (79 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: […] how did the initial bats catch insects in flight to have enough food to survive. […] This is in addition to the fact bats are the only flying mammals with no known predecessor.

dhw: Do you expect to find a complete fossil record of every life form that ever existed? The first bat fossils go back 50 million years. Maybe 50.9 million years ago there were insect-eating mammals just embarking on flight experiments, though still getting food from the ground. What trace of you do you reckon will be found in 50 million years’ time?

DAVID: I'll be cremated, so none.

Great reply!:-D

DAVID: As for bats, you are stuck with 'maybe' suggestions.

NOBODY knows how speciation happens, and so we can only offer “maybes”. Please tell us why you think my “maybe” is impossible.

Biological complexity:
DAVID: When DNA formed these protections had to be designed in place.

dhw: Did they? Which came first: disease or antidote? Evolution is the history of cells responding to new conditions by changing themselves, and changes survive if beneficial (natural selection) [...]. But you believe the antidote was designed by your God before the arrival of the disease. If so, why do “pathways” fail?

DAVID: Explained long ago. Protein molecules are free to fail and many backup protections are in place. If they weren't there from the beginning survival of new forms is very questionable.

If cells had not been able from the beginning to meet new requirements by changing themselves, there would have been no evolution. If cells were free to fail, this suggests they were also free to succeed. (Support for my free-for-all theory.) Your theory denotes that your God did not have total control over the system he designed. Why else would he have tried to provide “backup protections”, many of which have also failed?

QUOTE: […] “Here, we validate that exon shuffling is a major evolutionary force generating genetic novelty, and we provide evidence that DNA transposons fuel the process” etc.(David’s bold)

DAVID: … Where does the new necessary designing information come from? […]

dhw: The answer is in the bold. Transposons cause mutations by “shuffling” information around, and mutations create the novelties. But the word “mutation” is not synonymous with randomness! [...] So here’s a clue: the scientist who first proposed the existence of transposons was Barbara McClintock, a Nobel prizewinner who was a firm believer in cellular intelligence.

DAVID: What the article and you suggest, totally unproven, is shuffling existing information somehow produces new information. Pure Darwin hopefulness.

The usual muddle produced by the word “information”. I shouldn’t have taken the bait. Transposons are segments of DNA that can move around and cause mutations which may result in new structures (“genetic novelty”). Not pure Darwin, because mutation is not synonymous with randomness. Agreed?

Bacteriophages weird genome
Your illogical conclusions from the fact that everyone must eat are dealt with on the “theodicy” thread.

dhw: There is also a slightly strange dichotomy of thought between your awareness of the need for balance and the fact that human interference has already wrecked many individual ecosystems, and your refusal to acknowledge human activity as a possible global threat to the entire planet’s ecosystems.

DAVID: I know we are a threat. Note all the articles I have presented about how we screwed up beautifully operating ecosystems.

That is why I’m surprised at your refusal to take climate change seriously.

QUOTE: The key to human evolution may have been at the back of our minds all along – literally. (David’s bold)

DAVID: […] My bold above is a thoughtless conjecture. The frontal lobes do the decision making for the cerebellar actions. The cerebellar improvements were vital accompaniments.

We are in agreement. The cerebellum changes as it responds to and implements ideas/thoughts/decisions created in the frontal lobes. I would suggest that the key to evolution is the ability of all sections of brain and body to reorganize themselves in response to new requirements.

QUOTES: "The findings help shine a light on how the animals evolved their body and behaviour to adapt to marine life – an incredible feat. (dhw’s bold)

This has happened multiple times, with groups like whales, sea turtles, sea cows and crocodiles, all evolving from land-dwelling ancestors that have adapted themselves for a life at sea.” (dhw’s bold)

DAVID: Typical Darwin think. We have no idea how these adaptations happened from a natural series of chance, random mutations. Note how the authors use purpose to explain the changes. Why not consider they were designed.

There is no mention of random mutations. Your hatred of Darwin is warping your understanding of what you read. The authors say these life forms “adapted themselves”. They leave open how this is done. I suggest that they could only have adapted themselves through the autonomous ability of their cells to make the changes. THAT = purposefulness and design. I presume your theory is a 3.8- billion-year-old computer programme, or a dabble before the animals entered the water.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum