Hi Prof. Standish
Unfortunately my subscription to Athens ran out a long time ago and I don't
have access to the paper you mention.
I'm still not sure you've addressed the crux of the argument. Lets say you have
a bunch of codons that when processed by a replicating mechanism spit out a
bunch of amino acids. Lets say the replicating system isn't optimized and has
low redundancy so that
codonA -> aa1
codonB -> aa2
codonC -> aa3
Now there is a random mutation in the mechanism that ought to offer some
redundancy:
codonA -> aa1
codonB -> aa1
codonC -> aa2
codonD -> aa3
Unless there has been a concomitant mutation in the DNA strands the mechanism
will process, this 'optimization' is in fact catastrophic. Far from being
optimized the fidelity of the system has dramatically dropped and the amino
acids spat out by the mechanism will be hugely error prone. The phenotype will
be useless. This is what Dawkins means when he says :
“Any change in the genetic code ... would have an instantly catastrophic effect,
not just in one place but throughout the whole organism. If any word ... changed
its meaning, so that it came to specify a different amino acid, just about every
protein in the body would instantaneously change ... and this would spell
disaster.”
That kind of stumps the possibility of natural selection within individual
coding mechanisms. They can not develop from low to high fidelity. It doesn't
matter how much time you give them.
"Er, competition? If you can see how all different codes existed at one
point at different parts of the globe, and you can see that the region
boundaries are unstable (no mechanism like speciation, or
bilingualism, to keep different codes distinct), then it follows that
the code with the best replication ability will ultimately dominate."
Yes, like I said, I can see that. I can see that there could be competition
between a number of different coding strategies. One strategy could win out
over the others in terms of fidelity. But whilst that is natural selection it
isn't really evolution. This is why Stathan is keen to point out that there
*are* other coding strategies found in nature.
Probably, there is an abiogenetic story whereby coding strategies pop out of
the primordial soup quite randomly and that therefore this isn't quite the
issue for evolutionary theory Stathan supposes. He hints at that with reference
to Dawkins.
Alternatively, maybe Im just barking up the wrong tree. Wouldn't be the first
time...
Best Regards
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 14:04:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Serious proof of why the theory of evolution is wrong
From: yann...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
According to Smolin's Fecund Universe hypothesis since verified by Poplawski's
GR spin theory,it's generations of universes all the way down
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:57 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
I doesn't appeal to me. It seems to be
just an otiose layer of explanation on top of "the universe just
is", but it seems possible.
Brent
On 8/6/2013 8:10 AM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Does Deism
appeal to you at all Brent?
-----Original Message-----
From: meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 6, 2013 12:14 am
Subject: Re: Serious proof of why the theory of evolution is
wrong
On 8/5/2013 6:21 PM, Telmo
Menezes wrote:
It allows annoys me how christians justify all the suffering and
overall shittiness of existence with: ah, but that is necessary
because God wanted us to have free will.
He apparently
also wanted us to have leukemia, AIDS, plague, tsunamis,
volcanoes, malaria, polio, influenza, and smallpox.
None of which have anything to do with 'free will',
except maybe polio and smallpox which we DON'T have
because human beings found a way to suppress them.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
No virus
found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3209/6554 - Release Date:
08/05/13
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
