Post reply

Reply to the message by dhw

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> DAVID: [i]Your comment does not explain the gaps in complexity which in the Cambrian is enormous.[/i] dhw: [i]As I commented at the end, no one has an explanation. That does not invalidate my point[/i]. DAVID: [i]It seems you cannot see the enormous jump in complexity, whole organ systems from simple sheets of cells requires planning. Only a mind can do that.[/i]-I see it. I cannot explain it. No one can explain it. A mind could do it. Millions of minds could do it. A mind could create millions of minds to do it.-DAVID: [i]You miss my point. The excuse for gaps is that soft tissue won&apos;t fossilize, but it does and it doesn&apos;t close the gaps.[/i] dhw: [i]You miss my point. No one has an explanation for the gaps, regardless of whether the fossils are bones or soft tissue.[/i] DAVID: [i]Of course there is no logical explanation at a natural level. that is why the supernatural is required.[/i]-Nothing is &#147;required&#148;. If there is no logical explanation, one can keep an open mind. But as always I must remind you that the intelligent cell hypothesis does not exclude your God. -dhw: [i]If bacteria are individual, sentient, cognitive, intelligent beings, as some eminent scientists claim, then some will follow the same old routine but others will explore new possibilities, especially when they combine. Multicellularity is the key to innovation, and innovation - as I keep saying - is not a matter of survival but of improvement. Improvement is not &#147;required&#148;, but is the product of intelligent &#147;minds&#148;.[/i] DAVID: [i]But multicellularity is an enormous jump in and of itself. Simply invoking it does not solve the problem of producing it from simple single celled organisms, which you presume act like an ant colony.[/i]-I presume nothing. I offer cellular cooperation as an alternative hypothesis to your all-encompassing computer programme. However, since we know that single-celled organisms are capable of cooperation, it is not unreasonable to suppose that multicellularity took place through the cooperation of single-celled organisms! This is not an invocation but an explanation. Simply invoking a supernatural intelligence does not solve the problem of producing it from first-cause energy.  -dhw: [i]Or rather know-nothingism. Why pretend you know something you can&apos;t possibly know? That is why you have to resort to faith.[/i] DAVID: [i]Inference to best solution.[/i]-Best by what criteria? Stick to faith!