Miscellany (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, July 24, 2021, 16:46 (1216 days ago) @ dhw

Immunity system complexity

DAVID: And my retort is God created those cells to know how to respond to new infections. […]

dhw: I don’t have a problem with this – they would “know how to respond” can simply mean they have the intelligence to work out solutions as each new problem arises. It’s when you talk of them being programmed 3.8 billion years ago with every solution, or being given instructions (God pops in whenever there’s a new problem) that my credulity is stretched.

I believe God designed each stage of evolution knowing how each stage could/would handle future problems by using His implanted instructions. Popping in is primarily at each new stage creation. "Dabble" is only at each new stage of evolution design.

T-cells

DAVID: They are designed/coded to respond this way. They are coded to respond to new events.

dhw: Perhaps you could be a little more specific about the meaning of “coded” and “programmed”. As above, is this the 3.8-billion-year-old code/programme for every single new problem/solution/development in the history of life? Or God planting instructions whenever there’s a new problem? Cells are “designed to respond” could mean they have been given the intelligence with which to work out their responses. That’s fine with me, but it's totally the opposite of your theory that they have been given the individual solutions to every individual problem in advance.

As above each new stage is designed for its future needs, based on an underlying very flexible genome code present in its initial design in bacteria.

Specific organs protection:

DAVID: The cells do not have the capacity to create new species!!

dhw: Stated with your usual authority, as if you knew that for some reason your God could not or would not provide cells with the intelligence to join together in communities and produce increasingly complex designs, building on the designs of their predecessors (= common descent, which you sometimes believe in and sometimes don’t).

I accept the appearance of common descent. Design requires an ability to foresee future needs. See new ID entry.

Theistic evolution vs Darwinism [...]

dhw: You stated that agnostics and atheists were leaving, and I have asked for clarification, since such a statement could imply that atheists and agnostics are now abandoning Darwin’s whole theory, and also that they are turning to God.

DAVID: The evidence is some are turning to ID. I view your personal research as incomplete without reading some ID info.

dhw: I have long ago accepted the argument for intelligent design, and you may recall that you yourself put the case in your two books, which I have read and admired. It is perfectly possible to accept the logic of the ID argument without rejecting common descent and without becoming a theist.

Have you really accepted it? Al of us accept common descent which is not an active issue

Microglial repair mechanism
QUOTE: "Rather than simply cleaning up debris, the microglia began forming pouches. These pouches didn't swallow up damaged material, as many immune cells do. Instead, they began tending to swollen dendrites—the branches of nerve cells that transmit nerve impulses. They weren't removing, the scientists realized; they appeared to be healing."

dhw: One might compare these cell communities to ant colonies, as all the individuals go about their business, contributing their particular form of intelligence to the functioning of the whole community.

All in the programming.