Epigenetics: Passing the effects (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, February 06, 2015, 18:28 (3372 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I have never denied that organisms have self-evolutionary abilities. I've discussed epigenetics endlessly here. It is the issue of how independent those abilities are that we are in disagreement about. -Dhw: Your argument has always been that cells / cell communities are automatons obeying instructions. You have, however, recently tried to introduce a concept of semi-autonomy. We have agreed that no organism can “self-evolve” beyond the limits imposed by its own nature and by the environment, but for you even the weaverbird cannot be granted a sufficient degree of autonomy to design its own nest.-DAVID: Simply, the nest is too complex for the weaverbirds to have designed it. But they could have been helped in the design development, a cooperative effort, much like a parent teaching a child how to dress. View it like coaching cricket. Coach demonstrates, player learns and improves.-So God took time off from preparing the way for humans in order to coach the weaverbird, monarch, salmon, spider? That's the only way the process could have been divinely cooperative. And the reason? Let me guess. Because they were all essential for a balanced food supply? (And only God knows who eats the nest.) My alternative is that the birds themselves cooperated in pooling their (God-given?) intelligence to develop the design. No need for God to get involved at all.