Cellular intelligence (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, February 01, 2022, 11:59 (813 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You have no evidence that complexification occurs in ANTICIPATION of the new tasks that are to be performed later, just as you have no evidence that speciation occurs IN ANTICIPATION of conditions that do not yet exist.

DAVID: It all depends upon interpretation. A huge brain that appears barely used 310,000 years ago, that can easily accommodate all the new uses we have found over the time since it appeared, is obviously is ready for all that can be anticipated.

In my theory, all stages of expansion would have been able to accommodate some new uses through complexification until the capacity for complexification was exceeded by some major new requirement. The need for more cells RESULTED from a requirement, and the brain did not expand BEFORE the new requirement existed. In our case, however, complexification took over from expansion, and each new complexification takes place as a RESPONSE to new requirements. Therefore neither expansion nor complexification is an example of evolutionary changes taking place in anticipation of new requirements.

DAVID: Once again you turn to secondhand designing. I view God as never giving up tight control.

Your “view” does not invalidate my argument and does not provide a single example to illustrate your theory of anticipation.

dhw: NB It remains a theory, however. I only ask you not to reject it, as you do, solely on the grounds that although it offers a logical explanation of life’s history, it conflicts with your own rigid belief.

DAVID: A debate does not involve acceptance. I think your view is wrong.

I did not ask you to accept it. I asked you not to reject it. That is the difference between agnosticism and rigid belief. In a debate, one should be able to defend one’s viewpoint through reasoned argument, not through mere repetition of “I think you’re wrong”.

Transferred from “More Miscellany”:

DAVID: The mutations required for any early Cambrian has been calculated by ID into the millions of years. Using the same math Darwinists do. The phenotypic gap survives.

dhw: By “mutations” I can only assume you and they mean random mutations. But mutations are not by definition random! If you believe in common descent, then as above even your God has to engineer mutations, and so these wonderful calculations do not take into account the possibility of intelligent design. But oops, they do, because ID-ers like yourself would claim that the brief period (= sudden appearance of new species) can only be explained by an intelligent designer. And that could be your God, or it could be intelligent cells (perhaps originally designed by your God).

DAVID: […] What happened so quickly cannot be natural.

What do you mean by “natural”? If your intelligent God can do it, why can’t he have designed an intelligent mechanism that can do it?

dhw: The next entry might help us:
How proteins find the right DNA spot

DAVID: […] How the molecule knows its target is still not known.

dhw: […] So perhaps at the very least we should reserve judgement on the possibility that it is capable of autonomously and rapidly processing information and taking decisions. As you once wrote: “Those molecules literally act as if they have minds of their own.”

DAVID: "Those molecules literally act as if they have minds of their own”] simply refers to the brilliance of their design.

Yep, a molecule with a mind of its own would certainly be a brilliant design. Why do you assume that a life form that acts intelligently (as if it has a mind of its own) is not intelligent and does not have a mind of its own?

Thank you once more for your integrity in presenting the next article, which again emphasizes my point that mutations are NOT random:

Evidence of non-random mutation
QUOTE:"A new study by a team of researchers from Israel and Ghana has brought the first evidence of nonrandom mutation in human genes, challenging a core assumption at the heart of evolutionary theory by showing a long-term directional mutational response to environmental pressure.”

NB This also emphasizes that evolutionary changes are RESPONSES to changing conditions, and do not take place in ANTICIPATION of them.

QUOTE: "Contrary to the widely accepted expectations, the results supported the nonrandom pattern. The HbS mutation originated de novo not only much faster than expected from random mutation, but also much faster in the population […] where it is of adaptive significance. [dhw’s bold]

NB “de novo”. I’m not saying this provides proof of Shapiro’s theory, but it emphasizes that “evolutionary novelty” arises from cells’ responses to conditions. Note also the emphasis on speed.

DAVID: Livnat says complex information accumulates in the genome to guide it. Did God create the mechanism to accumulate information?

I like your question, and would extend it. Did God create the mechanism which not only accumulates information, but also processes it, communicates it, and takes decisions on how to use it? The theory of the intelligent cell does not in any way exclude your God.