More Denton: Reply to David (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, August 03, 2015, 17:01 (3190 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Of course 'once a pattern is successful it is passed on', but that fudges the issue. I've seen all sorts of birds nests that are successful for all sorts of birds. Why is each nest specific for each type of bird? It all makes evolution look patterned and planned or designed. Tony's point holds.
> 
> dhw: My proposal: each type of bird has its own type of intelligence, and each originally designed its own nest to fit in with its own requirements. Once it had proved efficacious for the particular type of bird, the “blueprint” was passed on. Evolution is patterned and planned and designed by organisms as and when new patterns/plans/designs are needed or made possible.-If you simply recognize that God gives each bird its intelligence, then the plans and patterns and designs make perfect sense. You seem to prefer a scattershot view of evolution reminiscent of Darwin's approach with trials going forth in every direction until the survivors are sorted out. lots of wasted effort. The Cambrian explosion belies this. No scattershot fossils in the gap. 
> 
> DAVID: And this removes any sense of my agreement about your continuous use of the word 'autonomous' in regard to an onboard IM. In this scenario only 'semi-autonomous' works. 
> 
> dhw: Firstly, then, can you think of any form of guidance or direction that does not involve preprogramming or direct intervention?-Frankly, no. Guidelines limit invention to certain pathways, but considering the wonders of Nature, those guidelines are broad, although I continue to believe that humans were the goal. 
> 
> dhw:In other words, please explain what "semi-autonomy" means in this context.-Answered above.