Miscellany (General)

by David Turell @, Saturday, August 21, 2021, 16:29 (62 days ago) @ dhw

Transferred from “theodicy

DAVID: With those instructions God need not step in further. We differ in our use of autonomous. Those cells are free to act on their own with the instructions they contain. They do not invent their own instructions.

dhw: I wish you would tell us what those instructions consist of. If they are not what I have just proposed, they can only be precise directions as to HOW each new threat can be recognized, what interpretation to put on the new information, and exactly what to do in order to produce the brand new antibodies. But if our cells only have to do what your God tells them to do, they are NOT autonomous.

God does not 'tell them' each time. They have original instructions to follow every time they are needed. Thus they have autonomous action (by my definition) every time needed.


The role of survival in evolution

DAVID: God has his design motives for speciation. Survival is not the driving force for God's evolution.

dhw: But you have just said that your God makes the changes so that the organism can SURVIVE for each new stage. Speciation occurs when changes occur, and if your God makes the changes to enable the organisms to survive, then speciation occurs because your God wants the organisms to survive!!!

Another non-answer to my point. Survival does not drive evolution.


Retinal design allows prediction of movement

DAVID: We bred bloodhounds for superb smell. Your brain question is totally off point. Stages of brain growth are known.

dhw: You tell us that “Irreducible Complexity (IC) means full design at every beginning of a species.” Of course every pre-wolfie/doggy species had a complete sense of smell, and every pre-sapiens species had a complete brain No problem. But there are vast differences between the noses and brains of all the different species, and you keep telling us that complexity increased with every stage. Are you then saying that each different nose and brain was a separate, irreducibly complex design, or is it possible that noses and brains developed/improved/complexified over the millions of years of speciation? And, to revert to our earlier example, do you really believe that whale flippers were a brand new, complete, irreducibly complex design (“full flippers at once with minor adaptation later”), as opposed to being an adaptation of legs to enable pre-whales to improve their chances of survival in the water?

Are you denying the huge gaps between all steps of all species?


dhw: I would humbly suggest that complexity alone is a powerful argument for design. I really don’t know why it needs to be “irreducible”, since the term requires all kinds of nebulous distinctions.

Nebulous because you have never studied it. Irreducible complexity means what is being studied has to have been designed, as it could not have developed stepwise by a series of modifications of exiting parts. You really need to read Darwin's Black Box which has a lengthy explanation. The bacterial flagellum has something like 28 coordinated parts, the source of each unclear. This deeper consideration of the source of the complexity out of its past is a powerful addition to the complexity argument. You need it.


Cambrian explosion: More early brains found
Quote: "The fossils, belonging to an arthropod known as Leanchoilia, confirm the presence—predicted by earlier studies in genetics and developmental biology of insect and spider embryos—of an extreme frontal domain of the brain that is not segmented and is invisible in modern adult arthropods. Despite being invisible, this frontal domain gives rise to several crucial neural centers in the adult arthropod brain, including stem cells that eventually provide centers involved in decision-making and memory."

dhw: It’s nice to read about the decision-making powers of arthropods. Please can you explain how these early brains are classified as irreducibly complex, and the more complex later brains of every different species are also irreducibly complex. Does God have to do a “full design” of every brain of every species, or is it possible that what you call “minor adaptations” may also extend as far as major adaptations, with different life forms complexifying according to different requirements, all the way through to the brain of H. sapiens?

You are back to full Darwinist in the bold with descent by modification


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum