More miscellany Parts One & Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Wednesday, September 18, 2024, 19:11 (21 hours, 42 minutes ago) @ dhw

Theoretical origin of life

QUOTES: In the sciences, adaptive function refers to an organism’s capacity to biologically change, evolve or, put another way, solve problems

dhw: c At some point in the Universe’s history, matter became purposeful. It became organised in a way that allowed it to adapt to its immediate environment.

A totally nebulous statement as usual.

dhw: The second quote shows that “problem solving” tells us absolutely nothing about the origin of life. The question is how matter became purposeful and intelligent enough, not only to solve problems but also to reproduce itself, become conscious of its environment, change its own structures etc.

More of the same. Consciousness appeared in what way?

DAVID: I view this as the anything but God/mind approach. Obviously a designing mind is necessary to explain life's origin. Note my bolds showing the need for information handling. Life builds a library of necessary information which it uses.

dhw: It’s not life that builds the library but living organisms, i.e. intelligent cell communities. If your uncaused God exists, he would have designed them. If he doesn’t exist, then we are back to uncaused energy and matter, which is no less nebulous than uncaused consciousness.

I'll stay with designing mind is necessary.

Earthworm DNA is weird

dhw: They suspect that this is the case, and I have no idea why you are so resolutely opposed to it.

DAVID: It is an extension of Shapiro's theory, which can happen factually only in bacteria.

dhw: It is not a “fact” that it can happen only in bacteria. That is your subjective wish and/or opinion.

Tell me where else it happens, please.

And under “plate tectonics”

DAVID: Speciation is a major form of adaptation, and no one knows how it happens. Cells don't/can't form now major designs.

dhw: Since no one knows how it happens, how can you know that it DOESN’T happen Shapiro’s way?

DAVID: NO EVIDENCE. Do you have some?

dhw: How many more times? If species have the autonomous ability to adapt, it is not unreasonable to theorize that this ability might extend to innovation, as per Shapiro. See also the next item:

There is no speciation happening now for us to study. Still all theory.

The brain: profound changes in pregnancy

QUOTES: "The breakthrough is based on the neurological changes of one first-time mother, who had snapshots of her brain taken before, during, and after pregnancy.”

"As the pregnancy advanced, researchers noticed a widespread shrinking of gray matter, which is the brain tissue that includes the bodies of neurons.”

“How these brain changes relate to behavioral changes is unknown.”

DAVID: this process presents an interesting question. It is purposeful preparation for a future event, caring for a newborn. Chance evolution, as Darwin proposed can't possibly produce this result. Only a designing mind could.

dhw: We know that all kinds of experiences result in brain changes, so it’s hardly surprising that the arrival of a new body inside the mother’s body would do the same. But the changes are not preparation for a future event – they are responses to an on-going present event: see the first two quotes. If you must bring in your usual swipe at Darwin (though I agree that such processes are not by chance), then I will bring in my usual reference to Shapiro: here we have a prime example of cell communities responding intelligently to new conditions.

The birth is an anticipated event. Neurons initially recognized a future event is coming. This study went all the way to after delivery when changes still occurred!