Review of Spetner's book (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, November 20, 2014, 20:48 (3444 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: The Talmud quotes refer to 365 original types of organism which adapted into the current bush of life...
dhw: By “original”, does he mean these types were all created at the beginning, or does he think they came into existence over billions of years?
DAVID: 365 types of mammals were created at the beginning and then adapted into what we see today, through his NREH.-Do you believe that life began with 365 types of mammals?
 
dhw: Does he count humans as “original types” or “adaptations”?
DAVID: He doesn't say directly but implies original humans were part of the 365 original forms. He refers to 4 eras of creation as described in the Talmud.-If 365 types of mammals were created at THE BEGINNING, what was created during the subsequent three eras, and when? Do you believe humans could have been created at the beginning? Do you take this claim seriously?-dhw: Does he share your conviction that God's aim in creating life was to create humans?
DAVID: Since he feels God created everything, I'm sure he fells that way, but doesn't discuss it directly. He does not believe in common descent, but in direct creation.-Not much support for you so far!-dhw: Does he/do you think every innovation was contained in DNA from the beginning, or does he/do you believe God created each one individually?
DAVID: He describes somewhat vaguely his NREH. It does all the adapting after the original forms are created. He specifically says that environmental changes and inputs pushes the NREH to create the variations. -You have repeated the claims about adaptation, but I'm asking about innovation - relating both to organs and to lifestyles. It's seems that this whole aspect of the problem is dealt with so vaguely that it gets us nowhere (this is perhaps unfair on Spetner, as I'm relying on your interpretation of the book).-DAVID: Spetner obviously believes there is an inventive mechanism built into DNA probably from the very beginning. And describes his NREH as such.
dhw: An inventive (and not merely adaptive) mechanism present from the very beginning sounds precisely like my idea of a Non Random Evolutionary Hypothesis!DAVID: But our argument is at the level of how stringent are the guidelines in an IM/NREH. He doesn't comment. He simply says it HAS to be there and it works, quoting epigenetic evidence now in development, but not present at the time of his first book in which the NREH was presented.-Same as above. Our whole discussion centres on just how much autonomy the inventive mechanism might have.-dhw: The balance of Nature has constantly shifted throughout the history of life, and if you think Chicxulub was a natural, unplanned catastrophe, I really don't see how you can imagine that God has planned Nature's balance specially for the sake of humans.
DAVID: Life stays in balance. -No it doesn't. It constantly shifts its balance - hence extinctions, innovations, dominance, decline...-DAVID: No, I cannot link the expectation of humans to the balance, but to maintain life in which energy requirements must be met, life must come back to equilibrium when disrupted, and if we believe the aging techniques are correct, humans began to appear slightly over one million-plus years ago, from a start of life at 3.6-3.8 billion years ago. In neither book does he discuss radioactive dating. How orthodox is his Jewishness is shown by his spelling God: "G-D", a sign of being very, very strict. But his obvious religious views do not detract from is criticisms.-I can't see the relevance of the date of our arrival, or Spetner's Jewish orthodoxy to your anthropocentrism. Of course life must come back to some sort of environmental equilibrium after it's been disrupted, or it will not continue - but the equilibrium will have CHANGED. Eventually, past changes somehow led to humans, but if changing environmental conditions were not planned, God's supposed plan to produce humans depended on luck.
 
DAVID: Once again, I must pound on you. His entire first chapter discusses the amount of information that must be present at the beginning of life implanted in the DNA code. -You do not need to “pound” on me. I keep repeating that the beginning of life must have included not only the mechanisms (or the information to make the mechanisms work, since you don't like “mechanisms”) not only for life itself, but also for reproduction and for evolution. I do not recall ever minimizing the complexity of the earliest forms of life.
 
DAVID: Those critical of Darwin present the information argument. I'm briefly in Wagner's book now. He sides with Darwin, and information has no special mention so far, and is not mentioned in the index. This is a huge dichotomy in thought. Information cannot develop from rocks and water, and Darwinists chose to ignore the point, because they appear to have no answer.-Darwin's Origin does not deal with the beginning of life. Our own discussion is not about the beginning of life either, but about evolution. Nobody has an answer, but for the sake of argument, I keep offering you an inventive mechanism designed by your God. However, this does seem to be just about the only support Spetner can offer you, so I can understand your need to bring it in!