Re: Darwin misquoted on Wikipedia Natural Selection

On Sep 13, 12:26 pm, backspace <sawireless2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 13, 7:49 pm, John Harshman <jharshman.diespam...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

backspace wrote:
John Harshman wrote:

Here's another, chosen at random, that shows the relationships among all
species of parrots: de Kloet, R. S., and S. R. de Kloet. 2005. The
evolution of the spindlin gene in birds: Sequence analysis of an intron
of the spindlin W and Z gene reveals four major divisions of the
Psittaciformes. Mol. Phylogen. Evol. 36:706-721. I could go on like that
forever.

Lets presume that all creatures descended from a single cell. How does
this explain where the control algorithms comes from?

I don't know what you mean by "the control algorithms".

Extend your arm in front of you and hold a weight. Now keep it steady
as I add additional weight. Your brain has established what is called
in control theory a "Set point" that is to keep your arm at a certain
level irrespective of what weight it has to bear. As I put on a 1kg
disk your muscles sends back signal via the nerves to the brain
telling it that there is added weight. The brain calculates how much
additional tension in your deltoids must be produced to counter this
added weight. It will be some sort of proportional , derivative or
integral signal in classical control theory, but the brain uses neural
control.

This control mechanism is universal in lets just keep this to mammals
for now. We are told over and over about some
stupid lame gazelle who could not run fast enough and was munched by
the ferocious tiger and how the stronger gazelle ran away. What people
completely fail to grasp is that this is a red herring. The real
question is how did the PID control mechanism in both the dead gazelle
and live stronger gazelle arose in the first place?

Talk about red herrings!

Why do you think the Gazelle needs a feedback mechanism other than
"TIGER!! RUN AWAY!"?

The mechanism you describe doesn't exist, nor should it. The
interaction between predator and prey, and its effect on the evolution
of both species is a complex interplay between speed, hunger,
alertness, fear, determination, genetic variation, and the
differential reproductive success of both species.

... Where did it come
from, because as any control engineer will tell you a feedback control
loop is *Irreducibly interdependently complex* .

That's your problem. If you want to talk to an engineer, you need to
ask him/her questions about constructed things, not biology. If you
want to know the answer to questions about biology, then you need to
ask a biologist. If you ask questions, they will usually answer. Of
course, it helps if you are actually *interested* in the answers,
rather than trying to score rhetorical points on someone's scoreboard
somewhere.


This is just a point of logic - you either have the control algorithm,
nerves and actuating muscles all working in sinc all at once or you
have a dead gazelle to begin with - the thing won't even walk and
would die of starvation before the fearsome tiger would get it.

This is a rather lame variant of the 'irreducibly complex' argument.
The argument fails on several points. First, and foremost, the
argument is based only on personal incredulity. You don't think it
could evolve, therefore it can't. This is false, as it has been shown
over and over again, for various features of various species, that
these characteristics *can* and *do* evolve. Second, the whole idea
of IC is that if you remove a single piece of the system, the system
fails. However, it has been shown that these complex inter-dependent
systems can arise through routes where each step in the system confers
a selection advantage. This is true at the molecular level (where the
idea of IC was first proposed) and at the behavioral level, where you
are trying to shoehorn IC into the behavior of a prey animal. Now,
back to our poor gazelles: Your argument appears to be that if an
animal doesn't have control over it's muscles then it is lunch for
predators. This is a no-brainer. Of course that is true. But how
about we not cut out the entire evolutionary history of the animal
like you have done. Do simple single-celled organisms have control of
their muscles? No, because they don't have muscle tissue. If you
compare simple organisms to more and more complex organisms, you will
find that other things get more complex along with gaining features
like muscles. Their nervous systems become more complex as well. It
doesn't happen overnight, as you seem to imply must be the case, but
rather over long periods of evolutionary time.


Lets take this fanciful story of a flea scratching chimpanzee turning
into a human.

Pedant point: you mean the common ancestor of chimpanzees and humans.
Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees. I have to give you credit for
not saying "monkey" though.

... How on earth did the brain change the control
algorithms? And not just the algorithms how did the muscles and
algorithms interdependently cooperate at the first moment this chip/
human hybrid arose?

A chimp/human hybrid is probably not possible since the two species
have different numbers of chromosomes, and that's not how we evolved
anyway. There is no 'hybridization' of a single individual. Rather
the features and characteristics of an entire species (or population
within a species) changes all together, gradually.


The flagellum's mechanical parts we can at least sketch and visualize.
What is not even being discussed is the control algorithm inside the
flagellum that in an *Irreducibly interdependent* way senses the
viscosity of the fluid and then actuates the stator and motor to
propel it at just the right speed through the fluid.

I doubt such an algorithm exists. The supposed IC natures of the
bacterial flagellum has been dealt with here multiple times. Check
out the archive for more details. (http://www.talkorigins.org).

... How do we even
begin to write down the equations for this? The flagellum has some
sort of *goal* it wants to move from A to B.

ITYM 'bacterium' not 'flagellum'. No, I really doubt it has that much
thought.

... If the rotor turns to
fast it will overshoot and to slow it will undershoot. For the
flagellum to reach its target it must implement PID control
proportional, derivative and integral so that it accelerates with just
enough force to reach the B position. And the same for the gazelle, it
must jump the small stream so that it doesn't fall into it yet not
exert so much force that it jumps into the rocks on the other side. We
thus a have some sort of universal control mechanism that uses PID
control to propel both the gazelle, human, ape, fish,whale and
flagellum. How did this IC (Behe pragmatics)control mechanism arose
independently in all living creatures
from the flagellum to the blue whale?

Independently? Who said anything about independently? Common
features tend to indicate a common ancestor.


I would like everybody to really try and get to grips with the problem
specification.

Another red herring.

... Formulate your theory in terms of the problem
specification and we might stop these nonsense stories about stronger
and bigger tigers being stronger and bigger because the weaker tiger
is dead.

You have not demonstrated that they are nonsense.

... Our whole culture is bogged down in one huge tautological
mess. Our language has become tautological.

Yours certainly has.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Darwin misquoted on Wikipedia Natural Selection
    ... evolution of the spindlin gene in birds: ... in control theory a "Set point" that is to keep your arm at a certain ... the ferocious tiger and how the stronger gazelle ran away. ... of both species is a complex interplay between speed, hunger, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Darwin misquoted on Wikipedia Natural Selection
    ... Your brain has established what is called ... in control theory a "Set point" that is to keep your arm at a certain ... the ferocious tiger and how the stronger gazelle ran away. ... flagellum that in an *Irreducibly interdependent* way senses the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Darwin misquoted on Wikipedia Natural Selection
    ... in control theory a "Set point" that is to keep your arm at a certain ... the ferocious tiger and how the stronger gazelle ran away. ... This is just a point of logic - you either have the control algorithm, ... flagellum that in an *Irreducibly interdependent* way senses the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Darwin misquoted on Wikipedia Natural Selection
    ... I don't know what you mean by "the control algorithms". ... the ferocious tiger and how the stronger gazelle ran away. ... flagellum that in an *Irreducibly interdependent* way senses the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Homo erectus, city dweller and sailor
    ... I have studied world history, human history, religions, philosophy, ... Thenthe instant ice age was followed up by a 19,000 year ... but what had become of the other species and ... against nature and a burning desire to control everything on the ...
    (sci.archaeology)
Loading