Return to David's theory of evolution PART ONE (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Wednesday, December 29, 2021, 14:52 (224 days ago) @ dhw

PART ONE

DAVID: Your imagined evolution of a much larger human brain requiring an anatomic stop is answered by yourself as not necessary.

dhw: I don’t understand your reasoning. Firstly, you have told us that sapiens brain only expanded by 200 cc, which does not make it “much” larger than that of our immediate predecessors, and secondly I have proposed that a “much” larger brain would require changes to the anatomy, and that is WHY the existing process of complexification took over. Unanswered question: do you think the brain could have gone on expanding indefinitely?

I assume previous brains had complexification and used it. The fact our brain shrunk 150 cc with heavy use shows your imagined need for huge brains was never an issue.


DAVID: Your approach is backwards. The brain expands first and then new lifestyles appear, as history and archelogy demonstrate.

DAVID: Your long paragraph about past brains ignore the facts we know about our current 315,000 year old brain, which arrived prepared for the uses of today, and shrunk 150 cc with current use. Obviously prepared for the future.

dhw: Each successive brain expanded and was then efficient enough (no doubt through complexification) to cope with the uses of its “today” until new requirements made it necessary for more cells to be added. Sapiens brain could not go on expanding indefinitely, and so complexification became more efficient – so much so that the brain shrank. There are no known examples of the brain changing in ANTICIPATION of future requirements. Why do you find this theory unreasonable?

How do you know complexification became more efficient? Our brain is a known example, much lager before much more use!!!


dhw: The question remains: do you believe your God designed the new species de novo BEFORE conditions changed or in response to the new conditions?

DAVID: Always in anticipation of future requirements for use.

dhw: And so pre-whales sat on the beach with their brand new flippers waiting for God to provide a reason for them to enter the water (or waiting for him to provide the water).

DAVID: Please study the whale series, rather than imagination. Transitional forms with swimming legs are part of it. Not legs to flippers in one step but with large gaps in form:

dhw: I use the whale example precisely because it makes nonsense of your claim that your God designs every evolutionary change in advance of requirements. So now you agree that your God did not give pre-whales flippers before they entered the water. On the contrary, legs passed through several transitional stages as the organism adapted to new conditions (life in the water). Or do you think your God kept popping in every few thousand years to make "itty-bitty" adjustments to his less than perfect designs?

The gaps in form are all huge requiring major phenotypic changes. Look at the species with open eyes. Why do you think the sites that believe in God tout the series?


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum