Let's study ID: giraffe plumbing (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, October 11, 2021, 11:02 (13 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: God started all life from no precursors.

dhw: Of course the very first life would by definition have had no precursors!

DAVID: Thanks!!! God can create from no precursors, can't He?

Yes. And that is your first problem: if your God’s only purpose was to produce humans plus food, and he can create whatever he likes from no precursors, why didn’t he do just that (as in Genesis)? Second problem, why did he first design all those other life forms and foods that had no connection with humans? Your answer to both questions: No idea. Go and ask God.

dhw: Just over a week ago, you wrote: “Designed Evolution means we are directly connected to bacteria by progressive designed stages.” But now: “The Cambrian start all of our current phyla” (which must include humans), and there are no precursors. You can’t have it both ways!

DAVID: Why not? Life's origin and the Cambrian show God's powers. Outside of these two events my designed evolution fits.

The problem is not “God’s powers” but God’s purpose and method of fulfilling that purpose. First you have him evolving humans in a direct line from bacteria, then you have him starting from scratch in the Cambrian. Outside of this blatant contradiction, what does your “designed evolution” fit? See second problem above.

Immunity system complexity
DAVID: You get a splinter in your skin. Inflammation always happens, but here only you can solve the problem with your tweezer.

DAVID: The inflammatory reaction is a standard body response to all insults, and is taught in the first day of med school pathology classes. Immune cells appear immediately, recognize non-self and begin automatic responses. Pus is purpose.

dhw: Yes, the inflammation is automatic. Why have you left out the conscious recognition of the splinter and the conscious use of the tweezer?

DAVID: That is at your brain level. The point I was trying to make is inflammation is the same automatic reaction to all invasion whether you react or your cells do.

But unfortunately for you, your analogy went beyond inflammation to the thinking me recognizing that I had a splinter and finding a solution to the problem by using a tweezer. Yes, the inflammation is automatic, but the solution requires conscious recognition and thought in finding the solution.

DAVID: Don't you read my answers? Immune cells recognize non-self and make killer or modifying proteins attached to the foreign antigens; the same answers always are under standard instructions.

I read your answers, which include the following:
DAVID: Immune cells recognize foreign substances (non-self). Antibody response is always to kill or alter the invader by adding the same proteins to proteins in the invader. The library is used only for repeat invaders. Responses to new invaders simply add to the library.

First, recognition is an act of cognition, and second, you have agreed that each new invader requires a NEW antibody, which is then added to the library, which accumulates NEW volumes throughout our lifetime. So why do you keep insisting that the answers are always the same? Please tell us what new volume is added to the library.

DAVID: The response is always the same for every invasion: inflammation and the same antibodies added to all different foreign protein. My agenda is not to fool you but to teach you.

What you teach me is that cells are automatons, as opposed to being “cognitive (sentient) entities that act and interact purposefully to ensure survival, growth and proliferation. They possess sensory, communication, information-processing and decision-making capabilities” (James A. Shapiro). I accept that you are not trying to fool me. I just don’t accept that your personal beliefs are the only possible conclusion one can draw from the known facts.

DAVID: See new entry today about RNA science for vaccinations and corrections of errors.

The entry has nothing to do with vaccinations or invasions: it concerns “a neuromuscular disease...triggered by a genetic malfunction “ But even here, we have a thinking analogy: 'You can think of the RNA polymerase as a newspaper reporter and the spliceosomes as a very, very stringent editor that cuts 9 out of 10 paragraphs the reporter writes.” And the author acknowledges a mystery:

The only limiting thing here is our understanding of how the RNA is controlled by various regulatory programs within the cell.

"Using high-precision experiments, mathematical modeling, and artificial intelligence, Kinney aims to clarify these mysteries at the level of molecular biophysics—how the spliceosome reads the RNA sequence and makes its cutting decisions.

DAVID: All of this reads as automatically controlled reactions following instructions. No sign of cell thought involved.

So we still don’t know how cells make their decisions when there’s an error in the system your God designed (genetic malfunction) or nasty invaders attack the system from outside. But according to you, in the case of invasion the cells themselves build up a library of responses with each new antibody adding a new volume, but they don’t build it up because your God has already preprogrammed them, or pops in to give them vague “instructions” although he doesn’t intervene. Mystery upon mystery!


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum