Complexity, Evolutionists Biggest Problem

by Sea Breeze 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Anony Mous

  @Sea Breeze: that is indeed the current understanding of physics. Time is a construct of the current laws of physics as a result of the interaction of gravity and space, it has not always existed.

  Although a lot of these things don’t make intuitive sense (we didn’t evolve to live in a place without time so it can be hard to understand) but the math is rather simple and easy to understand.

  Simple things can have complex results, for example the Mandelbrot set is easy to compute and define (z^2+c) but infinitely large, complex and “beautiful” to look at.

  Basically you have two proponents: infinite regression of more complex creators or the regression to zero of less complex things that create more complex things through simple processes. We have evidence to the latter, from zero you get virtual particles that eventually interact and create a Big Bang (which wasn’t really a bang but more of an inflationary period). For the former there isn’t much evidence, if any, nobody even amongst its believers agrees on the evidence. Arguing for more complexity as the cause of less complexity (turtles all the way down) is possible, just less understandable and not mathematically sound.
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Here are links (and accompanying headings) to great news from 03-24-2021 about how we now know in a major way why human brains are so much bigger than non-human ape brains. What is reported in the articles is the effect of the type of expression in just one gene making the huge difference! See the following:
  

  - "Lab-grown mini ‘brains’ of humans and apes reveal why one got so much bigger: Using lab-grown mini-brains, scientists have figured out why humans have bigger brains than those of apes" at https://www.livescience.com/human-ape-brain-evolution-differences.html .

  - "Scientists discover how humans develop larger brains than other apes" at https://phys.org/news/2021-03-scientists-humans-larger-brains-apes.html . That article says in part the following:

  "A new study is the first to identify how human brains grow much larger, with three times as many neurons, compared with chimpanzee and gorilla brains. The study, led by researchers at the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge, UK, identified a key molecular switch that can make ape brain organoids grow more like human organoids, and vice versa.

  ...
  

  To uncover the genetic mechanism driving these differences, the researchers compared gene expression—which genes are turned on and off—in the human brain organoids versus the other apes.

  They identified differences in a gene called 'ZEB2', which was turned on sooner in gorilla brain organoids than in the human organoids.

  To test the effects of the gene in gorilla progenitor cells, they delayed the effects of ZEB2. This slowed the maturation of the progenitor cells, making the gorilla brain organoids develop more similarly to human—slower and larger.

  Conversely, turning on the ZEB2 gene sooner in human progenitor cells promoted premature transition in human organoids, so that they developed more like ape organoids."

  Thus, scientists have discovered a major part of the explanation to what the WT and other creationist organizations imply is an solvable mystery of how unguided evolution could have caused such a huge difference in brain size between Homo sapiens and non-human apes. [For example, see page 55 of the WT's book called Is There a Creator Who Cares About You?]

  The God (as Creator) Hypothesis and the Intelligent Designer/Creator Hypothesis are completely unnecessary (and superfluous) in explaining how diversity of life came into existence on planet Earth.
  
• 

  Phizzy

  Complexity is no problem to people who can see and understand the Science.

  The very first life on the Planet was to a degree, from this layman's point of view, somewhat complex, but I can easily appreciate that no outside influence was needed for it to develop.
• 

  Vidiot

  I keep telling everyone here...

  ...no matter what they may say, any creationists’ objections to evolution are - at their core - ideology-based...

  ...not science-based.

  Intellectual honesty... creationism’s biggest problem.
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  https://xjwfriends.com/2018/02/22/weighed-wanting/ has an excellent post/article called 'Weighed and Found Wanting – A critical analysis of “The Origin of Life” and “Was Life Created?” ' While exposing the problems of the two WT brochures it also makes an excellent case for the biological evolution.
  
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  @Disullusioned JW - I don't know what your point is.

  One gene makes a lot of difference for humans and chimps or gorillas. Well, so what?

  Humans and chimps diverged at least 8 million years ago, although chimps are our closest living relatives.

  The chimp genome is approx. 98% identical compared to ours.

  The only sensible conclusion is this: humans and chimps share a fairly recent (in geologic terms) common ancestor.

  Edit: just realised you're not actually dismissing evolution, lol.
  
• 

  hooberus

  Basically you have two proponents: infinite regression of more complex creators or the regression to zero of less complex things that create more complex things through simple processes.

  Why would the claim that ‘the origin of organized biological complexity is evidence for an intelligent designer,’ necessarily also require an infinite regression of more complex creators?

  You have to add several extra assumptions to the arguments of intelligent design advocates in order to try to generate an infinite regression. Assumptions not found in the arguments.

  *organized complexity defined as complexity composed of parts, such as a biological system composed of proteins.