Miscellany (General)

by David Turell @, Friday, May 07, 2021, 19:36 (265 days ago) @ dhw


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

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

Your problem is there are no predecessors. In most series we find them. it's like the Cambrian Explosion.

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.

dhw: 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.

I'm discussing molecular failure, and you jump to cell failure. Why?


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.

dhw: 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?

It is still a shuffling of genetic information. transposons may be God's way of introducing new information.

Bacteriophages weird genome

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

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

Will you read the current info foreign to you if I send you a major skeptic website populated by scientists?

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.

dhw: 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.

Correct. God designs all advances in evolution. The article infers random Darwinian mutations to make the new aquatic species.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum