Re: [asa] Guided evolution mechanism?

Hi Christine,

Comments? Thoughts? The bunny smiles.

Back in 2005, I reviewed another paper and noted:

"This study does not in any way indicate a fundamental flaw in Darwin's
Theory. Nor does it demonstrate that bacteria can target the specific genes
needed to survive the environmental insult. What it does do is help us
understand that life takes control of its fate. Living things are not
passive participants of the interplay between stochastic events and
environmental pressures, where mutations that just happened to exist are
favored in an environment that just happened to exist. Instead,
environmental challenges are met with a truly biotic response. First, the
cells try to repair themselves. But if this fails, then they seek out an
adaptation by maximizing their chances of finding an adaptation. Evolution
is, at least, partially controlled by properties intrinsic to life.

While the teleological echo is faint, it is nevertheless there. We can begin
to catch a glimpse of evolution as homeostasis."

I then explained the connection to front-loading (which I often define as
'RM + NS under contol'):

"Thirdly, and most importantly, these type of findings are expected from the
hypothesis of Front Loaded Evolution. This hypothesis entails that the
future is designed through the present. To do this, designs at one point in
time must be carried across deep time. To design in this manner, we would
thus predict that evolution is dependent on biotic context, as it is this
context that houses the design. In other words, if evolution was purely a
function of random happenstance propagated only because such events happened
to elicit greater fitness against the backdrop of haphazard environmental
conditions, we would predict that the ability to design the future through
the present would be quickly swamped by noise. But if there is a strong,
intrinsic component to evolution, the designs are buffered against such
loss."

Concerning the cell and its contents, Bruce Alberts noted back in 1999,
"But, as it turns out, we can walk and we can talk because the chemistry
that makes life possible is much more elaborate and sophisticated than
anything we students had ever considered." Sometime in the future, another
leading scientist will write, "But, as it turns out, we exist because
evolution has been much more elaborate and sophisticated than anything we
students had ever considered."

- Mike Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christine Smith" <christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:03 PM
Subject: [asa] Guided evolution mechanism?

> Hi all,
>
> Well, I think this would impact some of the discussions we've been having
> :)
>
>>From the ASA Science & Faith blog:
>>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081111183039.htm
>
> Excerpt: "Applying the concepts of control theory, a body of knowledge
> that deals with the behavior of dynamical systems, the researchers
> concluded that this self-correcting behavior could only be possible if,
> during the early stages of evolution, the proteins had developed a
> self-regulating mechanism, analogous to a car's cruise control or a home's
> thermostat, allowing them to fine-tune and control their subsequent
> evolution....
>
> ....The scientists do not know how the cellular machinery guiding this
> process may have originated, but they emphatically said it does not
> buttress the case for intelligent design, a controversial notion that
> posits the existence of a creator responsible for complexity in nature."
>
> Can someone provide some more background on "control theory"?
>
> It sounds to me like they're basically saying that cells, or the chemical
> components of cells, can actually direct (or at least exercise influence
> over) their own evolution? If so, does this imply that they are conscious
> in some manner? How else could they "control" anything in an "intentional"
> sense? If it is indeed "intentional control" at the cellular level, then
> besides consciousness residing at that level, I can't help but to think it
> would bolster the design argument?
>
> Comments? Thoughts?
>
> In Christ,
> Christine

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 12 23:38:37 2008