More "miscellany" (General)

by dhw, Tuesday, January 25, 2022, 08:38 (794 days ago) @ David Turell

Pseudogenes

DAVID: this is a review from non-ID source material. Who named pseudogenes? Darwinists!! Who named junk DNA? Darwinists!! Note current research, not done by IDers, is demolishing false conclusions by Darwin defenders. Almost all DNA is shown to function. Nothing seems accidental from chance mutations. With no evidence of chance, design emerges as required.

dhw: I don’t know how often you want me to repeat that this has nothing to do with Darwin, who would have had no idea about the importance of DNA, and more importantly, that the case against junk-DNA can in fact be used in support of Darwinism, which tells us that generally things only survive if they are useful.

DAVID: You really don't understand the import of junk DNA, which was invented by Darwinists to show that chance would produce junk in DNA. The howls from Moran and Graur over ENCODE prove the point. Graur went so far as to say if junk disappears so does Darwin's theory.

Then more fool Moran and Graur. Would you please explain why you disagree with my point that natural selection preserves what is useful (Darwin's theory), and that explains the survival of genes which some people thought were junk.

DAVID: No, Darwin didn't invent junk, Darwinists did!

I wouldn't call them Darwinists if they propose a theory that Darwin would never have thought of, and then fail to use Darwin's theory to explain the new findings.

Early quark-gluon plasma

DAVID: That quark-gluon plasma made up all of the matter of the eventual universe and contained enormous heat. From nothing? Not likely. The physicists act as if they really believe the hot Big Bang is real if they run experiments mimicking it. Guth et. al. proved to all at Hawkins' 60th birthday party celebration the BB had no past, so it had a mysterious start. God or ?.

dhw: Please don’t try to revive this nonsense about Guth “proving” that the BB had no past. He didn’t. Nobody can know what preceded the BB, if it happened. You and I have agreed that “before” may have been a sourceless supermind called God, who might have created earlier universes too during his eternal existence, or an eternal mish-mush of mindless materials and energy forming endless combinations. You dismiss the latter possibility.

DAVID: I sure do dismiss the latter bolded point of yours. So do all the theorists who look for a bouncing universe or other similar eternal theory. And I just read an article the other day by a physicist who stated Guth was fully accepted by his scientific community. I should have produced it here but didn't. Guth simply implies a spontaneous appearance with no past history.

Previously you told us that Guth had proved there was no “before” the BB. After much to-ing and fro-ing, you realized that you did not accept that, since you are convinced that your God existed before the BB (and might even have created earlier universes). Maybe it would help us if you found the exact wording of what Guth said he had “proved”.

The requirements of design

I was not going to comment on this until I read David’s final sentence:

DAVID: All design is for future use.

I agree, but this needs to be explained. Since we are talking about evolution, it is perfectly obvious that whatever is designed will continue to be used in the future so long as it remains useful. However, this should not be confused with the argument that adaptations and innovations are designed before they are REQUIRED! The inventor of the spear would have felt the need to find a means of killing without having to get dangerously close to his prey. But of course his design would be for future as well as present use. And to forestall David’s pet example, pre-sapiens brain expansions would have been a RESPONSE to requirements, and the new size would then have sufficed for the future until a new requirement needed additional capacity. In the sapiens brain, complexification has taken over from expansion.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum