More "miscellany" (General)

by dhw, Friday, January 07, 2022, 08:05 (13 days ago) @ David Turell

MATHS

DAVID: They use DNA mutation clocks, don't ask me how with calculus I don't understand, not knowing how speciation works. New species have new mutations shown by comparisons of DNA decoded.

Mathematicians don’t know how speciation works either, and so I presume your comments are your roundabout way of agreeing with me that they won’t be able to prove anything, no matter whether they are ID-ers or neo-Darwinists.

Consciousness
QUOTE: "SN: You argue that consciousness is unlikely to be exclusive to humans."
"Damasio: Right. We have different lineages in evolution, but it doesn’t mean that other creatures don’t have the possibility of getting to consciousness. […]

DAVID: […] Yes animals are aware of bodily functions, but that doesn't mean they have the degree of consciousness we have. Our degree is very special, and Damasio's atheistic guesswork is just that.

dhw:[…]. I doubt if anyone in the world would claim that other creatures have the same DEGREE of consciousness as us! And the belief that other life forms have a degree of consciousness has nothing whatsoever to do with atheism! It is perfectly possible to believe that elephants, octopuses, weaverbirds, ants and bacteria have their own form and degree of consciousness and intelligence, and that this was given to them by your God. As usual, you are demonstrating what Shapiro calls “large organisms chauvinism”.

DAVID: My obvious comparison is real and not chauvinism.

Of course it’s real, if we agree that different organisms have different DEGREES of consciousness. Damasio has not said other organisms have the SAME consciousness as ours! And what’s this nonsense about his octopus example being “atheistic”?

Evolution - Loss of traits
QUOTE: "The researchers showed that in zebra fish, loss-of-function mutations in the leucine transporter cause all fins to be short, while the overexpression mutation of the potassium channels causes all fins to be long. Either of those mutations by itself produces a clumsy fish. But when the two mutations are combined, the resulting zebra fish has long paired pectoral fins and shorter median fins, exactly the form of the flying fish. (David’s bold)

DAVID: more strong support for Behe's approach that evolution devolves to advance.

dhw: In this example we have a combination of loss and gain. We have already had this discussion. My proposal: If there is a new structure, or if an existing structure takes on a new function to meet a new requirement or to exploit a new opportunity, then it is inevitable that any structure which becomes unnecessary in the new conditions will lose its importance. The advance is not caused by the loss – the loss is the result of the advance.

DAVID: What a convoluted twist! We are discussing genome mutation controls with loss of previously established DNA genes. Genes are removed with a new recombination of existing genes creating the phenotypic change.

You have left out innovations, as you did last time. Your comment does not contradict my point: the losses do not CAUSE the adaptations and innovations that lead to evolutionary changes, but result from them because they are no longer needed.

Oxidative protection (Neanderthals and us)
QUOTE: "'The risk increases we see are large; several times increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease and vascular disease," says Hugo Zeberg.

DAVID: another finding which supports the theory that God preferred the arrival of modern humans with special attributes. Good we are not Neanderthals.

dhw: And a few days ago, you were telling us that your God produced all the different non-sapiens homos so that we would inherit all the good things they passed onto us. And […] according to you, modern humans didn’t just arrive. He designed all the good bits and the rotten bits of Neanderthal and the rest of the gang, and then he designed us. And bowel disease and vascular diseases are presumably the result of the “errors” your all-powerful God couldn’t avoid and couldn’t correct when he “had to” design the only system available to him.

DAVID: An all knowing God knows what works to produce life and God produced life from an inorganic universe he also created.

If he exists, then of course this is true. That doesn’t mean he produced all the different homos to pass on the “goodies”, and it doesn’t mean that despite his all-powerfulness, he created a system resulting in bowel disease and vascular diseases and other “errors” he didn’t want and failed to correct.

Obesity
DAVID: Only 15% of dieters maintain weight loss by mental determination. dhw and I are two of those folks. Weight loss requires a determined mental vigilance which is not easy. I know.

Ah, my chocolate and my cake of long ago…

Oxygen
DAVID: If life appeared 3.8 by ago, its chemical processes did not need oxygen. It is obvious more complex life forms were allowed to appear as more oxygen became available. And an obvious drive toward complexity existed, I propose designed by god.

Yes indeed, environmental changes either require or allow changes in life forms. Even if it were true that your God designed them, he would not have done so BEFORE the oxygen was available, but AS it became available. That is how evolution works: in RESPONSE to conditions – not in ANTICIPATION of them.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum