Return to David's theory of evolution PART 1 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, June 14, 2022, 22:32 (681 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: If God exists, I fully accept that he would run evolution “any way he wishes”, and I have offered various alternative versions of his wishes and his methods of fulfilling his wishes. As you view God, he had one wish, and fulfilled it by deliberately not fulfilling it until he had created all sorts of things that had no connection with his one wish. And you have no idea why.

DAVID: As above, His reasoning as to method doesn't matter to me. His created history tells me what He did.

dhw: And the history contains countless extinct life forms and econiches, most of which had no connection with the latest life forms (humans plus our food). It “doesn’t matter” to you that your reasoning concerning his possible purpose and method makes no sense to anyone, including yourself (only God can understand it). I don’t think you will make many converts with this approach to the quest for truth!

What you cannot comprehend is I do not question God's motives and what history shows me makes perfect sense to me as God's doings. This approach makes perfect sense to me, if not to you.>

Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: 410,000 years

dhw: I’m not disputing the findings, but I’ve got used to the fact that “recognized experts in the field” often disagree with one another, and since this is a brand new article, I thought there might be other views. In the abstract, it says:
"The replacement of the late Precambrian Ediacaran biota by morphologically disparate animals at the beginning of the Phanerozoic was a key event in the history of life on Earth, the mechanisms and the time-scales of which are not entirely understood.”

DAVID: What you have quoted is a standard form of beginning an article: there is a problem we are trying to solve and then results are presented of findings.

dhw: That does not mean that the findings represent an indisputable truth.

It will be hard to refute, since the uranium dating method they used is fully accepted, much to your obvious disappointment. This is a standard, not an ID article, but they have picked up to tout.

Consciousness: Penrose-Hammeroff
DAVID: this paper rules out a theory, which is what studies like this do. However, findings like the 410,000-year Cambrian/Ediacaran will stand until/or if another study refutes their method. The method they used is well-established. dhw hopes in vain.

dhw: I am not “hoping” anything, since the 410,000 year gap does not make the slightest difference to the arguments used to explain gaps in the fossil record.

dhw: First of all, how fully developed are the new forms?

DAVID: They lived as Cambrians. How much development was needed?

dhw: I have no idea. The article I quoted suggested that “many of the Cambrian organisms […] did not possess all of the defining characteristics of modern animal body plans. These defining characteristics appeared progressively over a much longer period of time.” You responded: “Form changes take time to develop new DNA instructional information. That is the required time lapse for speciation.” So I don’t think anyone can answer your question.

The issue still is even early Cambrians are vastly advanced over Edicarans, thus enormous change in a little bit of time.

dhw: And secondly, even 410,000 years is a long time in terms of generations, and it is generations that create new species, not time. You yourself wrote:
DAVID: The true answer to how long speciation takes is unknown. The many gaps don't tell us.

dhw: Once again, the argument revolves round missing fossils, not around time:

DAVID: The information I presented yesterday is exactly about fossils in two periods demonstrating the short time for massive change. Most gaps are much much longer as you know.

dhw: How does that counter the argument that speciation depends on generations and not on time? If you allow say 10 years for generations, you have 41,000 generations to produce your innovations. Halve it if you like. Even 20,000 generations should be enough for intelligent cell communities to come up with their innovations.

You are asssuming species change slowly over generations. There is no existing proof of that concept. All we have is fossil gaps. We do not know how species appear or the theoretical times involved. All you have is quoting hopeful explanations while I see a designer is required.