From: me22over7@gmail.com   
      
   On 8/01/2026 8:10 pm, jillery wrote:   
   > On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 23:38:12 +1100, MarkE  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 7/01/2026 11:16 pm, jillery wrote:   
   >>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 01:13:42 +1100, MarkE  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> I've recently claimed here that the 80 megabytes of information in the   
   >>>> functional portion of the human genome is wildly insufficient to specify   
   >>>> the development of a human [1] into the system that is us [2]. I've   
   >>>> suggested that the "missing" information must be located in the ovum's   
   >>>> cytoplasm, organelles and membrane.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I've directly asked a number of contributors here if they believe 80 MB   
   >>>> is sufficient to specify a human. This has generally been met with   
   >>>> silence. I can understand why, after an even cursory consideration of   
   >>>> [1] and [2]. Moreover, the implications of this for evolutionary theory   
   >>>> and biology are profound.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> That silence is the sound of one hand clapping, as all wait for you to   
   >>> say on what basis you think 80 MB is *insufficient* to specify a   
   >>> human.   
   >>   
   >> Do you think 80 MB is sufficient to specify [1] and [2]?   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > Why avoid supporting your own claim?  If I say it's sufficient, will   
   > you then demand I provide evidence to show that it is, so you can   
   > continue to avoid saying on what basis you think 80 MB is   
   > insufficient?   
      
   I've already stated that I am not able to calculate a specific   
   estimate. However, given that (i) [1] and [2] describe a system with   
   functional complexity exceeding anything we have made*; and (ii) we know   
   that 80 MB represents relatively a very small amount of information;   
   then a reasonable inference is that much greater than / orders of   
   magnitude greater than 80 MB is required.   
      
   I won't ask you to calculate or provide an estimate (though please do if   
   you can). But I will ask you again, do you think 80 MB is sufficient?   
      
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> Anyway, it seems that ID agrees with me. This may not help convince you,   
   >>>> but I'm encouraged that others think this is an issue that needs   
   attention.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> If you're unfamiliar, what you may find interesting is ID's proposed   
   >>>> solution: an "immaterial genome", with reference to Neoplatonism.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I'm not discounting that position, but do find it surprising! Would this   
   >>>> be a new creationist category, something like Continuous Creation? Some   
   >>>> may have less complimentary suggestions.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Anyway, enjoy (Ron, you may need medical attention after reading these):   
   >>>>   
   >>>> https://scienceandculture.com/2025/05/the-immaterial-genome   
   richard-sternbergs-labor-of-love/   
   >>>>   
   >>>> https://scienceandculture.com/2025/04/the-math-behind-the-i   
   material-genome/   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ______________   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> [1] FROM ONE CELL TO A HUMAN BEING: AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS AND ITS   
   >>>> MYSTERIES   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *Fertilisation* begins when a sperm and ovum fuse to form a single cell:   
   >>>> the *zygote*. In that moment, a new, genetically unique human organism   
   >>>> exists. Yet nothing visible distinguishes this cell from countless   
   >>>> others. What follows is one of the most extraordinary processes known in   
   >>>> nature.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ---   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ## 1. Exponential division without growth: cleavage   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Within hours, the zygote begins dividing: 1 cell becomes 2, then 4, 8,   
   >>>> 16, and so on. These early divisions, called *cleavage*, are remarkable   
   >>>> because the total size of the embryo does not increase. Instead, the   
   >>>> original cytoplasm is partitioned into ever-smaller cells.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Key features:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> * Division is rapid and tightly synchronized.   
   >>>> * Cells remain enclosed in the original outer membrane.   
   >>>> * The embryo reaches ~100 cells in a few days.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *What is striking:*   
   >>>> All cells initially appear equivalent, yet they are already on   
   >>>> trajectories that will lead to radically different fates.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *What we do not fully understand:*   
   >>>> How early asymmetries—subtle differences in molecular concentrations,   
   >>>> mechanics, and timing—bias later cell fate decisions with such   
   reliability.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ---   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ## 2. Self-organisation and implantation: the blastocyst   
   >>>>   
   >>>> After several days, the embryo reorganises into a *blastocyst*—a hollow   
   >>>> structure with:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> * an *inner cell mass* (which will become the body),   
   >>>> * and an *outer layer* (which will help form the placenta).   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The blastocyst implants into the uterine wall, establishing a   
   >>>> biochemical dialogue with the mother that allows pregnancy to continue.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *What is striking:*   
   >>>> This organisation emerges without a central controller. Cells “decide”   
   >>>> their roles through local interactions, gene regulation, and physical   
   >>>> constraints.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> *What we do not fully understand:*   
   >>>> How global structure arises so robustly from local rules, and why   
   >>>> implantation succeeds or fails so often despite apparently normal embryos.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ---   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ## 3. The body plan appears: gastrulation   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Around the third week, the embryo undergoes *gastrulation*, often called   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)