The AP Model and Shannon Theory Show the Incompleteness of Darwin’s ToE

self | January 26, 2009 | Jean F. Drew

[betty boop]

My deep thanks and appreciation to Alamo-Girl and CottShop for kindly agreeing to read the draft and for suggesting improvements, almost all of which were implemented. (And they'd all have been, had we not run out of space!)

Thank you so very much, A-G and CS!

[Filo]

There is no such thing as a “compelling case” for abject stupidity.

[DBCJR]

Thank you for this post!

[svcw]

As always brilliant.

[svcw]

So why did you post then?

[randog]

In layman’s terms, explain Williams’ Autopoietic Model, part v.

[RSmithOpt]

Reminds me of being forced to attend past sales meetings where dress, jargon, cell phone colors, advert pamphlet layout/impact were much much important than the speakers understanding (having a freeking clue) the function, future capacity, and design theories of a newly designed product pushed by our customers and available for market.

Sales people are not allowed into my labs unless accompanied by corporate.

[js1138]

Note here that, so far, science has not identified any naturalistic source for “information” within the universe, biological or otherwise. And yet it appears that living organisms remain living only so long as they are “successfully communicating” information.

That could be a very long time, considering that single-celled organisms are essentially immortal. Programmed cell death is a rather modern invention in living things, a requirement of having specialized cells.

[RSmithOpt]

Seriously though, my earlier post is not a slam.....the basis of the article is the thinking that has progressed for AI to become an everyday reality very soon.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the opportunity to preview your outstanding essay, dearest sister in Christ!

[DBCJR]

A Word about Abiogenesis
Darwin’s evolutionary theory does not deal with the origin of life. It takes life for granted, and then asks how it speciates.

---

That begged question has always screamed at me. Forget that ToE is an unproven theory when applied to inter-species, it does nothing to explain genesis.

[varmintman]

Excellent.

[js1138]

Forget that ToE is an unproven theory when applied to inter-species

If DNA cannot be used to determine kinship, there are a lot of court decisions that need to be reversed.

[varmintman]

Evolosers are always saying that. What it really translates into is something like “Hey, if we get good enough with the ad-hominems, we might could skate by with only having to defend one untenable ideological doctrine instead of TWO of em!”

[DBCJR]

Yes, OJ Simpson started that process as I recall.

[jimmyray]

There is no such thing as a “compelling case” for abject stupidity.

Regarding "compelling case", nothing like an ad hominem to validate your point of view.

[DBCJR]

Ah yes, the global warming theory! If it is factually occurring, which is a subject of debate itself, that humans “caused” it is HIGHLY debatable. What extends even further into absurdity is that algore is lobbying the Obama Administration and Pelosi’s Congress to make climate change illegal - that’s right, you heard correctly. If the climate changes, WE BROKE THE LAW!

[js1138]

Yes, OJ Simpson started that process as I recall.

Lots of OJ supporters on evolution threads.

[js1138]

I don’t see any reference to Szostak in your essay. Is there a reason?