Life as Evolving Software... (Chaitin) (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, December 26, 2011, 17:34 (4715 days ago) @ dhw

dhw,

Mainstream thought is, what I believe, is what you and David call gradualism. Both of you accept how genetic information flows from Generation 1 to Generation 2, and accept that key genes that contribute to (not killing) Generation 1, live on in Generation 2.

Where I think the confusion begins is that I hear "Gradualism" and then I hear you and David challenge it, when to me gradualism is exactly--Generation 1 sending information downstream into the future to Generation 2 and subsequent generations. SO the challenge to me has always had a ring of confusion to it...

The main sticking point between David and I (and possibly yourself) is the challenge that the process of normal genetic transfer is not sufficient for speciation.

Adding to the confusion is the charge by David where he claims that for example, in the case of whales, that "Gradualism cannot be the cause." What I am sure of however is that David appears to be claiming that these whales don't have a common ancestor... that the normal transfer of genetic information over time cannot be creative enough.

This is apparently where I diverge: Because we know and understand how genetic information flows, we don't really have a reason to think that explosions in the fossil record would be caused by anything other than the processes we have been studying since Crick and Watson discovered DNA. Epigenetics do not seem to me, to drastically change the equation--some genetic information will get passed on, but not from the DNA. (His discussions of how certain compounds exist in human ovum and are passed on.)

But we know that clearly--the majority of information resides in DNA and it is the primary mechanism of genetic information transmission. Epigenetics can only be really expected to either result in a permanent change to DNA or in passing forward certain small, single-function genetic operations. This is why I say that I don't see epigenetics causing a paradigm shift. It fills in gaps in our underlying understanding of genetic machinery... but it isn't sufficient to explain bursts of creativity.

As for the explosions in the fossil record--we can only make claims on what we witness. If you combine our knowledge of how genetic information is passed on, with the fossil record--there is only one reasonable conclusion--given the evidence at hand. Evolution can speed up and slow down its processes given demand.

In summary: I can't see beyond a G1-->G2 transmission of information being a key driver for observed changes in the fossil record. I identify this process as synonymous to gradualism, and therefore cannot step down the same path as David and yourself.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"