Evolution of Diversity (was The limitations of science) (The limitations of science)

by dhw, Friday, July 30, 2010, 10:56 (5229 days ago) @ George Jelliss

My thanks to George, who has referred us to an article from Science Daily, entitled 'Segmentation is the Secret Behind the Extraordinary Diversification of Animals'.-The theory is that arthropods, vertebrates (including us) and annelid worms may have inherited their segmentation from "a very distant ancestor that lived 600 million years ago". Segmentation makes it "easier for an animal to specialize a segment into a specific tool in response to a need, than to create a whole new organ from scratch." -I don't know why the heading is so definite (Segmentation is the Secret...), since the common ancestor is "what the researchers are now seeking to confirm", but whether they confirm it or not, I don't have a problem with it. Nor do I have a problem with the theory that all life is descended from one or a few forms, and that we and other creatures share a common ancestor. The only problem I have with George's post is his misrepresentation of my views when he writes:-"dhw...sees no way chance can create the diversity of life..."-So let me repeat for the umpteenth time: I am unable to believe that chance created the hugely complex mechanism whereby life, reproduction, innovation and adaptability came into being. Once the mechanism existed, of course chance helped to create diversification, through chance mutations and adaptation to the chance effects of environmental changes, with the aid of the non-random process of natural selection. The problem we have been discussing in relation to evolution is that of gradualism, and I can't see that the segmentation theory has any bearing on that. Let me also prevent further distortions by repeating that I'm equally unable to believe in an intelligent being which has existed for ever and designed this hugely complex mechanism. I therefore remain an agnostic who firmly believes in evolution ... including its various elements of chance ... though not in the gradualism that Darwin considered so fundamental to his theory.