Cellular intelligence (Evolution)

by David Turell , Wednesday, January 26, 2022, 16:02 (1030 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: I am not saying all cells connect with each other! Do you or do you not believe that cells communicate?

Of course they do in specific tasks.

dhw: One generation = one mummy and daddy, and the next generation = their offspring. We know the erectus brain capacity gradually increased: One website says that 1.7 million years ago, the average was 885 cc, but 200,000 years ago it was 1,186 cc. Doesn’t this suggest to you that brain size increased over generations? And we get excited when we find one fossil, but you want at least one fossil per cc.!

How do we know God didn't help with those intra-Erectus changes of enlargement? Remember sapiens started at close to 1,350 cc. So a jump gap exists. You still have not solved how baby brain communicates to mommy's pelvis

DAVID: Size change is the issue since complexification comes with each new-sized brain. My reason is the fact example of our brain, much too large for current use when it appeared. What requirements made it so big at its start?

dhw: How many more times? Nobody knows what requirements led to each expansion, which is why I have offered you a list of possibles (new ideas, inventions, discoveries, environments).

But we do know lifestyle comparisons. Early sapiens lived like late Erectus. Your requirements theory has no basis in known facts. Endogenous Brazilian tribes still aren't suing their brains as we do.

dhw: Yet again: why is this theory illogical, especially when compared to yours, in which your God operates on groups of individuals who wake up one morning with bigger brains and birth canals?

I accept you feel God is illogical. So?

Camels' noses

DAVID: And my problem, and really yours is we have no current evidence of epigenetics being capable of this degree of design complexity, which complexity you recognize.

dhw: You've just said that with your “evolved thought” you CAN accept epigenetics as being capable of this degree of design complexity!

The point is you and I do not know how far epigenetics can creete complexity

Molecular binding controls
QUOTE: "Using the detailed information they gleaned from studying these interactions, the researchers created their own synthetic molecule capable of binding extremely tightly to a protein called ENAH, which is implicated in cancer metastasis.

DAVID: this study shows how molecules know with whom to combine or react, automatically, no thought involved because of the design. Cell intelligence is in the design, not autonomously active.

dhw: Borderlines are blurred. Generally, molecules will indeed behave automatically in order to preserve an established system (though new systems will have been originated through intelligence.) If they don’t find the "right" combination, there will be problems. These may be the “errors” which your all-powerful God was incapable of avoiding and often of correcting. The example mentioned here is cancer – but these cells have found their own way of surviving. They “eat” us. In many cases, cells will also respond to invaders by developing new defences. This is where again I suggest automatic behaviour ends and intelligence comes into play. I know you disagree, but we should distinguish between automatic actions that maintain the status quo and actions that change the status quo (innovations) or constitute new responses to preserve it (as in the immune system or in adaptations). These are the circumstances in which autonomous intelligence comes into play, as opposed to your God directing or preprogramming every single response to every single new requirement for past, present and future evolution.

Cancer is an escape from control and literally errors in normal patterns. They may be wild but they don't think, which your theory requires..