More miscellany Parts One & Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Friday, September 20, 2024, 20:17 (5 hours, 58 minutes ago) @ dhw

Earthworm DNA is weird

dhw: Common sense suggests to me that just as bacteria are able to edit their own DNA in response to new conditions, the worm did the same.

DAVID: Your sense is not common, or the experts would not be puzzled.

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

DAVID: Tell me where else it happens, please.

dhw: The theory is that it happens whenever conditions require or allow changes to existing cellular structures. Just as it is your theory that your God wrote a book of instructions 3.8 billion years ago, or pops in to perform his operations or hold his courses every time conditions change

DAVID: Only minor adaptations are allowed!.

dhw: Your usual assumption that your opinion should be regarded as fact.

New species are found now, not newly evolved. It is a FACT we only see minor adaptations within species at this time.

The brain: profound changes in pregnancy

QUOTES: "The mother “had snapshots of her brain taken before, during, and after pregnancy”

“As the pregnancy advanced, the researchers noticed a widespread shrinking of gray matter….”

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.[…]

DAVID: Or were designed to do it.

dhw: My point is that the cells are intelligent, and I have always allowed for the theory that their intelligence was designed by your God, if he exists.

Thank you.

Scuba-diving lizards

QUOTE: water anoles are the first known backboned animal to use bubbles to help them breathe underwater, likely to escape becoming something else's dinner.

DAVID:[…] It looks like a learned instinct.

dhw: It looks to me like a stroke of genius. Whether the trick was deliberately devised or discovered by accident, it takes intelligence to master it, and of course its success meant it would have been passed on to future generations. Just like humans, our fellow creatures use their intelligence to find different means of survival. Thank you for yet another fascinating insight into the wonders of nature.

Thank you.

Ant intelligence: blocking pathogens
By controlling entrances and layout

QUOTE:"Group living is generally thought to increase the risk of disease, and this threat is particularly pronounced in social insects because of their low genetic diversity and frequent social interactions, factors which help disease to spread. Because of this, when faced with disease, “their strategies are typically targeted at protecting the group as a whole, rather than focusing on the individual,” says Stockmaier. (David’s bold)

DAVID: note my bold. Can ants recognize that concept of group protection? I doubt it and feel they were instructed by design.

dhw: What a measly, curmudgeonly response! At least you had the good grace to give this article the heading “Ant intelligence”. Why must you always doubt whether our fellow creatures are capable of inventing their own strategies for survival? This is what Shapiro calls “large organisms chauvinism” at its very worst!

Keep championing for Ant intelligence, because I will always present new views of what ants can do. Previously I have shown that individual ants are automatons with specific actions when required. The overall appearance is colony intelligence. The source of that intelligence is what we debate.