“The concept of frontloading, as presented by Mike Gene, is doubtless an original interpretation of evolution – which Gene does not question the reality of. He offers strong evidence of intelligent design in biology, especially with regard to the equipage of cells (the genetic code, error checking, machine-like character, etc.). In order to determine whether the concept of frontloading is substantive or not, further research is required. For example, I'm skeptical of whether directed co-option is a plausible mechanism, as Mike Gene asserts on p. 226. In my opinion, known processes of variation couldn’t supply the many big steps necessary simultaneously. It goes against my intuition that a selection process which is mainly engaged in eliminating more or less negative mutations should be capable of creating the immense diversity of life from neatly pre-programmed, one-celled organisms– but, of course, that’s not what counts in science.
Gene manages, at the least, to moderate some of the counter-arguments. However, what IS or ISN’T possible can only be decided by research. It’s altogether possible that tight limits of evolutionary changes will become evident. The arguments for design would remain untouched by such findings, because they can also be interpreted in the context of the 'basic-type-concept' (with polyvalent and flexible ancestors), and may also be tested in this context. This would mean: Frontloading within basic types, equipped with potential complexity as polyvalent ancestors.
The applicability of the Design-Matrix in the context of basic types works for the hallmarks analogy, discontinuity and rationality- and, as anyone can easily recognize, for the hallmark of “foresight“, too. However, in the context of the basic type model, this foresight would be much shorter than in a model of universal common descent. Foresight here would only include mechanisms of adaption and flexibility within a changing environment – but not extending far into the future. As it were, however one thinks of the theories of Evolution, Creation and ID: Reading this book is certainly worthwhile for anyone with a serious interest in the ID-idea.”
More about “basic types” and “polyvalent ancestors” (in English) can be found in:
SCHERER S (1998) Basic Types of Life. In: Dembski WA (1998) [Ed.] Mere Creation: Science, Faith & Intelligent Design. Inter Versity Press, Illinois. p.195 – 211.
SCHERER S (1993) [Ed.] Typen des Lebens. Pascal-Verlag, Berlin.
The editor Prof. Siegfried Scherer to the English reader of “Typen des Lebens”:
“Concerning the delimitations of taxonomical categories, no general agreement was yet reached: biologists do not have exact definitions for the categories they use in their daily work. The authors of Typen des Lebens (Basic Types of Life) use interspecific hybridization for classification purposes, an idea which has only very rarely been used in taxonomy. It is proposed that (i) the basic type taxon can be delimited experimentally by hybridization studies, (ii) it is not equivalent to any taxonomic category commonly used but is located between genus and family and (iii) the ancestral populations of basic types may not have been primitive but, rather, genetically polyvalent.
In order to introduce the English-speaking reader to the ideas presented, the first article which summarizes the basic type concept as well as the articles on the history of the species definition and the description of the basic type of canids are written in English. All articles conclude with an English summary to which in some cases extended figure legends are added.“
Posts
0 Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen