This thread really needs to go to sleep......
“In that case,” said Napoleon, “let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him.”
I conclude evolution is guided
by KateWild 532 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Viviane
-
Ruby456
just waking up now - edit okay - woke up a couple of hours ago now
have found that Nick Lane is an interesting guy and his research seems to be excellent, exciting and enchanting!!!!! (see below for my def of enchanting)
and yes he does reply to your electrochemical charge question Hadriel and this is evolution as I like it. Kate you will love it too!!!! thanks cofty and all.
Indeed it allows for the issues and suggestions I have shared too.
I think we need another thread on what we are up against if a poster uses God or Guided or Creator in the title in order to decide whether or not such ideas need to be quashed immediately or allowed to be explored from a scientific perspective. this would meant that we need to decide if it is the idea of God that is at issue or if it is unquestioning passivity to authority figures that is the real issue. If we think it is the latter (as I do) then we can allow people to explore more questions that can give people a sense of purpose, inspiration and value (this is what I mean by enchantment) in their onward journeys.
nick Lane's journey of discoveries in biochemistry are themselves enchanting in the sense I mean above
-
Ruby456
kate hadriel here is something for both of you from Nick Lane and William Martin. they emphasize the role of increasing the chance rather than the necessity of complex life developing - for example see below re the cell. But in our own viewpoints we proritise the necessity of conditions being a certain way and therefore posit God/creator/guided. this logic is certainly not fairy tale rubbish, illogical etc imo. Science (if we let it), however, welcomes all the others to whom and to which we owe our existence despite what ever humbling thing that may be as Darwin emphasized against some conservative thinking that emphasizes humans as the pinnacle of evolution's achievements (this latter is not hugely different form saying God did it and if we are going to allow the former than why not the latter).
basically my reading of probability and chance favours Darwin's understanding and welcomes Lane and Martin's research
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7318/abs/nature09486.html
access via open university library
...
affording the cell the chance—but not the necessity—of becoming complex....The transition to complex life on Earth was a unique event that hinged on a bioenergetic jump afforded by spatially combinatorial relations between two cells and two genomes (endosymbiosis), rather than natural selection acting on mutations accumulated gradually among physically isolated prokaryotic individuals. Given the energetic nature of these arguments, the same is likely to be true of any complex life elsewhere.