Return to David's theory of evolution PART 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, June 18, 2022, 14:17 (670 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: We know of no biological process or processes that produce new species.

dhw: So why do you keep harping on about them?

DAVID: Because it is obvious evolution is based on new biochemistry being avaliable for new forms.

dhw: If we don’t know of any biological process that produces new species, how is it obvious that “new biochemistry” produces new species? What is obvious is that if you believe in common descent (as you claim to do), biochemical processes must lead to new uses of available materials.

DAVID: The new biochemistry must be available to allow new forms. I have God engineering and you have ???

Possibly intelligent cells, possibly designed by your God. Please clarify what you mean by “new biochemistry”. Do you mean new materials, or do you mean new ways of using existing materials? And do you or do you not believe in common descent? In another post, we had this exchange:

dhw: […] we've been told that fundamental elements of the brain and nervous system existed much earlier than the Cambrian. This suggests the continuity of evolution (which you favour for the sake of a continuous line between bacteria and humans), as opposed to separate creation without precursors (which you favour as evidence for your God’s existence).

DAVID: […] the underlying biochemistry must precede all form advances. And early new forms will prepare for later new forms. Evolution!!!

This does not explain your self-contradiction, but it suggests that the materials are already present, and new forms result from new uses (or processes). I suggest that the early forms are not “preparations” (no crystal ball involved), but through “biological processes”, organisms (cell communities) adapt or innovate IN RESPONSE to changing conditions.

How did sex pop up?
DAVID: It required chromatin to appear so sex chromosomes could exist:

QUOTE: “'Our results underscore that the structural and regulatory roles of chromatin are as old as eukaryotes themselves,” Dr. Grau-Bové said.

dhw: Since chromatin is so vital for sex, we have yet another example of fundamental elements being present long before the arrival of the fully developed system. More evidence in favour of the continuity of common descent as opposed to organs and species suddenly appearing without any predecessors.

DAVID: Thank you for clearly supporting my biochemcial theory of evolution. With that basis, new forms can appear. Chromatin came as new biochemistry.

Chromatin is “as old as eukaryotes themselves”. The point is that we have several examples of fundamental elements being present long before the fully developed organs appear. See the bold above.

Immunity system: lung cells

DAVID: In design theory it is reasonably proposed lungs were first designed with these cells in place, or lunged species would not have survived.

dhw: Alternatively, fatalities would have resulted in the surviving cells gradually learning to improve their design. (You seem to think that every disease would obliterate the whole species!) […]

DAVID: After a time gap new species handle life very well. Means prepared in advance.

dhw: The time gap suggests to me that cells learn to handle the different demands. The “advance preparation” would be the provision of intelligence and flexibility, whereby the former uses the latter to adjust to changing conditions and requirements.

DAVID: How cells automatically have intelligence cannot be simply stated as fact. How did those intelligent actions happen? What mechanism?

Just like the existence of God and your own illogical theories of evolution, cellular intelligence is a theory. All dealt with in Part One.

Human membrane pore

dhw: If one part doesn’t work, the mechanism won’t work. Fits in perfectly with the concept of intelligent cells cooperating to create a mechanism that works. However, see above for mechanisms that do work but can be improved.

DAVID: So simple cell committees understand design for future use?

dhw: Why do you keep repeating this nonsense and making me repeat: CELLS DO NOT UNDERSTAND DESIGN FOR FUTURE USE! They respond to present requirements or opportunities. Once the response works, then of course it will be used in the future. The immune system provides a perfect example of the process!

DAVID: I repeat because you will not recognize the gaps in the fossil record. You always wish for missing fossils to fill your multiple generations theory.

You’ve forgotten the point: CELLS DO NOT UNDERSTAND DESIGN FOR FUTURE USE. They respond to the present. Nothing to do with gaps in the fossil record!

Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: 410,000 years

dhw: […] there are logical reasons why there may be no more fossils! But for some obscure reason, you think that a list of reasons published in 2019 is out of date!

DAVID: The list of reasons is not FACT, not proof, but reasonable guesses as to why they are absent. They can be all wrong also.

Agreed. The existence of God, and your theories of evolution are not FACTS, and the latter are so illogical that they are not even “reasonable” guesses. (They “make sense only to God.”) They can be wrong. Now please tell me why you regard the 2019 list of possible reasons for the absence of fossils as unreasonable.