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:

> > [b]Snakes, fungi, wasps and the possum[/b]
> 
> > DAVID: [i]Yep, Pete described in detail his concept to other possums. More just-so stuff.
> > [/i]
> > 
> > dhw: So you believe our fellow creatures can’t pass on information. What’s your own theory then? That your God went round to all the possums, inserting a programme for death-feigning?
> 
> It well could be programmed.
> > 
> > [b]Early human hunting weapons[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]I understand lots more than you seem to realize. I know we use meaningful hand gestures and facial expressions![/i]
> > 
> > dhw: Congratulations. So why do you wonder how our ancient ancestors managed to invent their weapons without the benefit of speaking American? Is it inconceivable to you that they might have had sophisticated modes of communication which helped them to manufacture sophisticated tools?
> 
> Meaningful grunts and hand gestures might well work.
> > 
> > [b]Sapiens brain[/b]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]I have no idea whether Bechly is the ultimate authority on our ancestry, but even if he is, it is nonsense to argue that our brain is a giant jump when there were Heidelhomos and Neanderhomos with brains of a similar size to ours.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]But not near the complexity. Size is only one small issue. Note the recent entry on brain complexity.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: It’s a major issue, since evolution has resulted in increasing sizes of brain. We agreed long ago that the sapiens brain stopped expanding and increased complexification took over. How does that indicate that there was a “giant step” from Heidelhomo and Neanderhomo to sapiens? Once more: do you believe your God created the sapiens brain “de novo”. If not, then you have accepted Darwin’s theory of common descent.
> 
> Sapiens brain added to past complex brains with a vast increase in complexity prior to future complexification by the same brain.
> > 
> > [b]New fossils found[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i] [...] The missing fossil argument is a prayer to save Darwinism a theory filled with multiple gaps in the record and multiple saltations of new species.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Every new link confirms the theory of common descent. At best, then, your belief has to be that Darwin’s theory is correct, but that your God also used direct creation when he wanted to. [...] .[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]A tiny portion of Darwin[/i].
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Please tell us the proportion of species proven to have been created “de novo” during the last 3.8 billion years.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]See Bechly today:[/i]
> > https://evolutionnews.org/2024/05/fossil-friday-three-modern-scientific-challenges-to-t...
> > 
> > "[i]the fossil record consistently documents a series of saltational transitions with abrupt appearances of new body plans and bursts of biological novelty within very short windows of time, which have been called revolutions, explosions, and ‘Big Bangs’ by mainstream evolutionary biologists for good reason (also see Bechly 2021, 2023a, Bechly & Meyer 2017). This phenomenon is ubiquitous in all periods of Earth history, in all geographical regions, and in all groups of organisms, from protists and plants to invertebrate and vertebrate animals.
> 
> > "These discontinuities in the history of life not only contradict the Darwinian core prediction of gradualism (i.e., an accumulation of small changes over long periods of time), but also raises another fatal problem for the feasibility of any unguided process as adequate explanation for the major transitions in the history of life (macroevolution)[/i]."
> > 
> > dhw:  I have no difficulty accepting that drastic changes in conditions might well lead to major changes within short periods (how short is short? Overnight?). And I agree with Bechley that macroevolution is too complex to have come into existence by chance (unguided process). Does he mention the theory that macroevolution is guided by the autonomous intelligence of cells?  
> 
> No. Your favorite theory unsupported.
> > 
> > [b]INTEROCEPTION[/b]
> > 
> > QUOTE: "[i]Powerful signals travel from the heart to the brain, affecting our perceptions, decisions and mental health. And the heart is not alone in talking back. Other organs also send mysterious signals to the brain in ways that scientists are just beginning to tease apart.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Yet again, we have confirmation that our bodies consist of cell communities that communicate with one another.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]All by design.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: I’m an agnostic. I’m open to the suggestion that cells are sentient, communicative, inventive beings whose autonomous intelligence was designed by your God.
> 
> Yes.