From: me22over7@gmail.com   
      
   On 31/12/2025 3:52 am, Martin Harran wrote:   
   > On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 23:22:43 +1100, MarkE  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 16/12/2025 1:23 pm, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>> On 12/15/25 4:53 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>> Larry Moran offers this analysis:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "...A small number of these neutral mutations will become fixed in the   
   >>>> population and it's these fixed mutations that produce most of the   
   >>>> changes in the genome of evolving populations. According to the   
   >>>> neutral theory of population genetics, the number of fixed neutral   
   >>>> mutations corresponds to the mutation rate. Thus, in every evolving   
   >>>> population there will be 100 new fixed mutations per generation. This   
   >>>> means that fixation of 22 million mutations would take 220,000   
   >>>> generations. The average generation time of humans and chimps is 27.5   
   >>>> years so this corresponds to about 6 million years. That's close to   
   >>>> the time that humans and chimps diverged according to the fossil   
   >>>> record. What this means is that evolutionary theory is able to explain   
   >>>> the differences in the human genome—it has explanatory power."   
   >>>> https://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2025/12/how-many-regulatory-sites-in-   
   >>>> human.html   
   >>>>   
   >>>> However, chimp to human evolution involves major (profound)   
   >>>> adaptations, including:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> - Bipedalism and capacity for long-distance walking and endurance   
   >>>> running: short, broad pelvis; S-shaped spine; long legs relative to   
   >>>> arms; arched feet with non-opposable big toe.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> - Cognitive capacity increase: larger cranial capacity; dramatically   
   >>>> expanded neocortex; highly developed prefrontal cortex; these produce:   
   >>>> abstract reasoning; symbolic language; long-term planning;   
   >>>> mathematics, music, art; large cooperative societies; etc.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> - Other physiology: extended childhood and adolescence; long lifespan;   
   >>>> high energy investment in brain development; reduced muscle mass   
   >>>> relative to body size; craniofacial morphology supporting speech   
   >>>> articulation and dietary flexibility; precision hand grip and fine   
   >>>> motor control.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> How many non-neutral adaptive mutations (in fact, highly adaptive,   
   >>>> complex and coordinated suites of mutations) are required, over and   
   >>>> above the estimated neutral/near-neutral mutations, to produce these   
   >>>> adaptations, and how are these accounted for in the time available?   
   >>>>   
   >>> How many adaptive mutations? A few thousand, perhaps. Coordinated   
   >>> suites? Why would that be necessary? And how they would be accounted for   
   >>> is simple: you should understand that a number of mutations many orders   
   >>> of magnitude greater than the ones that eventually became fixed would   
   >>> have happened during human evolution. The ones that were advantageous   
   >>> were therefore a small sample of a much larger number than you are   
   >>> imagining here.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Here's your dilemma:   
   >>   
   >> 1. The human brain is the most complex object in the known universe*   
   >>   
   >> 2. Chimps are uncannily intelligent, but human intelligence is on   
   >> another level: abstract reasoning; symbolic language; long-term   
   >> planning; mathematics, music, art; large cooperative societies; etc   
   >>   
   >> 3. Therefore, the evolution of the human brain and human intelligence   
   >>from a chimp requires either:   
   >>   
   >> (a) a very large increase in functional complexity; or   
   >>   
   >> (b) the activation of largely pre-existing, latent capacity   
   >>   
   >> If (a), then the generation of large amounts of new functional   
   >> complexity must be driven by adaptation (neutral drift without strong   
   >> selection cannot refine and ratchet up functional complexity);   
   >> therefore, the number of adaptive mutations required in this case would   
   >> be much, much more than "A few thousand".   
   >>   
   >> Larry Moran has taken most of the available mutations off the table in   
   >> declaring them neutral or near-neutral, and in doing so has left   
   >> dramatically too few adaptive mutations to do the necessary heavy lifting*   
   >>   
   >> If (b), then you've only shifted the problem, and raised this question:   
   >> how then did chimp brains acquire this latent capacity, since by   
   >> definition it has not previously been activated and expressed, and   
   >> therefore has not been selectable and built up over time.   
   >>   
   >> Moreover, this option is something like suggesting that an Apple M5   
   >> processor can be activated from an Intel Pentium processor with "a few   
   >> thousand gates of tweaking", or that GPT 1.0 plus "a few thousand lines   
   >> of code" could give you GPT 5.   
   >   
   > What is *your* solution to this dilemma? It seem to me you have two   
   > possibilities:   
   >   
   > #1   
   > God tweaked the existing systems in a common ancestor of man and   
   > chimps so that a human  descendant would eventually appear.   
   >   
   > #2   
   > God directly created man as a brand new species but acting as a   
   > designer, he adapted the plans he had already used for chimps.   
   >   
   > Which of those is it or have you a third option I haven't thought of?   
      
   Personally, I haven't resolved that question. I lean toward #2, as a   
   tentative OEC.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)