Genome complexity: what genes do and don't do (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, February 15, 2019, 19:11 (1896 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: We cannot really dispute what is in the first cells. We only have suppositions. I'm still awaiting Behe's book on deletions which would support my points.

dhw; Since we cannot dispute it, we should at least remain open-minded, as you appear to be when you accept my “possibilities”, but as you refuse to be when you reject them.

I am allowed to admit your possibilities are possible in view of the facts we know, But I have consistent conclusions which I feel are better. I will consider mine better until proven otherwise. Be content with my admission

Dhw (re "bacterial resistance"): Maybe the mechanism is not “spontaneous”, and maybe resistance/non-resistance depends on what you would call each bacterium’s “own operating system” for interpreting information and acting on it, i.e. “single cells change their metabolic pathways"… and “learn” and “create instructions on the hoof”, as proposed in the article you initially agreed with.
[…]
DAVID: If one percent are already resistant , there are no new instructions.

dhw: There is no way of telling whether the one per cent are already resistant (having presumably been given special instructions 3.8 billion years ago) or have worked out a way of resisting.

DAVID: Are you disputing science finds one percent are already resistant before the antibiotic is given?

dhw: Are you disputing science when it finds that cells learn, create instructions on the hoof, create instructions de novo? You have complete faith in scientists who appear to confirm your conclusions, but if they disagree with you they are hyperbolic fakers.

No answer to my statement. Science finds one percent are resistant to start with in many cases! In other cases they use gene transfer. How can that happen if the bacteria have to invent resistance by your favorite theory. Because antibodies are natural in nature and bacteria, molds and fungi use them all the time, resistance has naturally developed in the past. Penicillin, discovered in 1927 by Fleming, comes from the blue cheese mold!

Under “new axons may make local decisions”:

DAVID: I view it as the growing ends of the axon branches respond to local stimuli and either grow toward or away automatically according to instructions it carries.

dhw: […] Self-control, decision-making, autonomy, semi-autonomy, semi-independent are not synonymous with “automatic”. Thank you again for providing scientific evidence that contradicts your view of automaticity – or do you now wish to claim that these scientists too are fakers only interested in getting grants?

DAVID: They are not fakers. I view the final steps in reaching a connection are automatic molecular reactions. This earlier steps are as you describe.

dhw: The “earlier steps” are the processing of information, the taking of decisions, and the issuing of instructions. Then of course the final steps are automatic – otherwise the decisions and instructions would not be implemented! Thank you for at last accepting the possibility that the earlier steps are not automatic but are the product of cellular self-control and autonomous decision-making.

I think the decision-making is coded into the genome of each neuron cell. Information/ instructions all prepared for use by the designer.