More Miscellany: Bechly reappears (General)

by dhw, Sunday, May 19, 2024, 13:08 (186 days ago) @ David Turell

Snakes, fungi, wasps and the possum

DAVID: Yep, Pete described in detail his concept to other possums. More just-so stuff.

dhw: So you believe our fellow creatures can’t pass on information. What’s your own theory then? That your God went round to all the possums, inserting a programme for death-feigning?

DAVID: It well could be programmed.[/i]

Are you referring to the 3.8-billion-years-old instructions your God planted in the first cells for every species and every strategy, including death-feigning, for the rest of history, or to the ad hoc operations and courses he conducts whenever there's a new problem? Is this what all your theologians have taught you?

Early human hunting weapons

DAVID: I understand lots more than you seem to realize. I know we use meaningful hand gestures and facial expressions!

dhw: Congratulations. So why do you wonder how our ancient ancestors managed to invent their weapons without the benefit of speaking American? Is it inconceivable to you that they might have had sophisticated modes of communication which helped them to manufacture sophisticated tools?

DAVID: Meaningful grunts and hand gestures might well work.

What sounds like a meaningful grunt to you could be a language sophisticated enough to satisfy all the requirements of the grunters.

Sapiens brain

dhw: I have no idea whether Bechly is the ultimate authority on our ancestry, but even if he is, it is nonsense to argue that our brain is a giant jump when there were Heidelhomos and Neanderhomos with brains of a similar size to ours.

DAVID: But not near the complexity. Size is only one small issue. Note the recent entry on brain complexity.

dhw: It’s a major issue, since evolution has resulted in increasing sizes of brain. We agreed long ago that the sapiens brain stopped expanding and increased complexification took over. How does that indicate that there was a “giant step” from Heidelhomo and Neanderhomo to sapiens? Once more: do you believe your God created the sapiens brain “de novo”. If not, then you have accepted Darwin’s theory of common descent.

DAVID: Sapiens brain added to past complex brains with a vast increase in complexity prior to future complexification by the same brain.

So sapiens brain was not created “de novo” but evolved as per Darwin from earlier brains. Thank you.

New fossils found

DAVID: [...] The missing fossil argument is a prayer to save Darwinism a theory filled with multiple gaps in the record and multiple saltations of new species.

dhw: Every new link confirms the theory of common descent. At best, then, your belief has to be that Darwin’s theory is correct, but that your God also used direct creation when he wanted to. [...] .

dhw: I have no difficulty accepting that drastic changes in conditions might well lead to major changes within short periods (how short is short? Overnight?). And I agree with Bechley that macroevolution is too complex to have come into existence by chance (unguided process). Does he mention the theory that macroevolution is guided by the autonomous intelligence of cells?

DAVID: No. Your favorite theory unsupported.

There is growing support, as you have kindly shown with various articles, but yes, it’s only a theory. So is the existence of God, so is common descent, so is creation “de novo”, and so is your version of God’s messy, inefficient use of evolution to fulfil the theoretical purpose you impose on him.

INTEROCEPTION

dhw: I’m an agnostic. I’m open to the suggestion that cells are sentient, communicative, inventive beings whose autonomous intelligence was designed by your God.

DAVID: Yes.

May I take your “yes” to mean you are also open to the suggestion that cells have autonomous intelligence?