Let's study ID: giraffe plumbing (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Thursday, October 21, 2021, 15:34 (44 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You are the one who chopped up evolution into distinct unrelated times by totally misusing my quotes which simply state 'now' is not 'then'.

dhw: They state that past food was for past forms of life, and current food is for current forms of life. They are separate, and it is patently absurd to claim that every single past form and food was “part of the goal of evolving [=designing] humans” and their food.

Of course they are separate in time, but related by evolution.

DAVID: Darwin saw the gap I see. It is you who have abandoned him. What passed in evolution from Edicaran to Cambrian were evolved biochemical processes. In biochemistry evolution was totally continuous.

dhw: But according to you, we are descended from life forms which your God created without any precursors! Now suddenly, you’re talking about biochemical processes. Yes, all life depends on biological processes, but how does that come to mean that all life was designed specially as part of the goal of designing humans,

Wow!!! Life had no precursors either.

dhw: Nobody knows how God thinks, but since you agree that we (may)mimic your God, and his logic is (may be) like ours, and we probably/possibly have thought patterns and emotions similar to his, and you agree that my theories are logical (only if a very humanized form of God is considered) and are therefore based on the “clues” given to us by life’s history, I would suggest that your own version of a God who designs countless life forms which have no connection with humans, although humans were his one and only goal, does not have a clue to stand on!

I have corrected the distortions of my views in bold above.

Immunity system complexity
DAVID: That cognizance is automatic is what I was taught.[…]

DAVID: We who believe we know biochemistry see the automaticity in the protein reactions. […] biochemical professors preach automaticity.

dhw: You post articles and then try to ignore what they say and even what you yourself say:

QUOTE: “The only limiting thing here is our understanding of how the RNA is controlled…”
QUOTE: "Kinney aims to clarify these mysteries [...] how the spliceosome reads the RNA sequence and makes its cutting decisions."
QUOTE: “The way in which the human immune system manages to maintain this delicate balance in the intestine largely remains a mystery."
QUOTE: However, the mystery of the way in which IgA antibodies regulate the consensual coexistence in the intestine has remained unsolved.
DAVID TURELL: The information for the standard cell production of antibodies is in the genome, and as yet a mystery.
DAVID TURELL: How [chaperone molecules] know based on protein reaction is yet to be discovered.

dhw: It appears that you “who know biochemistry” still have a bit to learn about biochemistry. McClintock, Margulis, Shapiro, Albrecht-Buehler knew/know a bit about biochemistry, and they think cells are intelligent.

DAVID: Those quotes you searched for to fit your desired view do nothing but that, not that they prove anything.

dhw: I didn’t search for them. They were contained in the articles you posted last week in the context of this discussion! This is not my "desired" view, but one which I feel solves the mysteries above, and there are some scientists who "know biochemistry" and support the theory.

None in the present literature. All found by you in much earlier entries years ago: "McClintock, Margulis, Shapiro, Albrecht-Buehler" your favorite go-to's for opinion, not any fact.

DAVID: All opinion that each of us has sitting outside the cell and looking in. Cells act intelligently is all you and I will agree to.

dhw: I’m glad you agree that they act intelligently, but that is the opposite of saying that they act automatically! The quotes you yourself posted show that you are wrong to assume that all biologists agree that all the intelligent actions are automatic. They simply don’t know how cells exercise the necessary controls. And nor do you and I, but you keep insisting that you do: your God provides programmes/instructions for every single action! And to add to the absurdity, you agree that cells are cognitive, but you think “cognitive” means without thought!

As for cognitive, I used the word differently as in the ability to recognize. As for current research, the latest techniques show 'intelligent' cell processes as controlled series of molecular reactions, all obviously automatic.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum