Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

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]Note my bolds. A very complex automatic arrangement. The T cells go through an important learning process. A system that must be designed to fill these requirements. Not by chance.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]An “automatic” arrangement by which cells go through a “learning process”! Every single new development must have begun with a learning process, and the ability to learn is integral to intelligence.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]And the learning process can be totally designed.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Yes indeed, we may all be robots without knowing it. On the other hand, the learning process can be the product of autonomous intelligence. You often quote the odds as 50/50, but happen to know that in our case it’s 100 autonomous intelligence, and in cells it’s 100 automatic.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]I'm allowed to have my interpretation. You have yours, wishing for innate cellular intelligence.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw:  Why is an acceptance of the possibility of cellular intelligence called “wishing for”? It is a hypothesis that provides a logical alternative to the unproven hypotheses of random mutations, divine dabbling, and a 3.8-billion-year-old computer programme for all evolutionary innovations, lifestyles, natural wonders etc. I feel obliged to repeat this every time you slip the word “automatic” into your comments. Yes, you are allowed to have your interpretation, but you can hardly expect me to let you get away with such an authoritative-sounding endorsement of your own subjective belief and rejection of my hypothesis!
> 
> I'll repeat. Every  time a scientist unearths a cell mechanism it is simply a series of molecular reactions. Life runs at very high speed. Each cell is like a production line factory, and they are all designed to be that way. I'll stick with 'automatic' from underlying design.