3 ms·
> I would be more inclined to believe if you told me that pre-adolescent brain spends 25% of its computing capacity on figuring out how to improve its body and
by exe34 2y ago
> I would be more inclined to believe if you told me that pre-adolescent brain spends 25% of its computing capacity on figuring out how to improve its body and encoding it into genes instead of trusting some random mutation (likely error-corrected) to do the heavy lifting.
this is an argument from personal incredulity. just because you are too dumb to understand how something works doesn't mean that your fantasy/sci-fi version is accurate. brains changing genes belongs in a discussion of Neal Asher's polity, not in a biology discussion.
- treprinum 2y agoSo you are saying that e.g. a large mammal lifespan of 70 years is sufficient to generate as many good random mutations as needed to grow a new leg over 10,000 generations if necessary? Where is the evidence of a fast algorithm requiring so few selections to come up with a complex new organ? How is that not blind faith? Not sure who is the dumb one here...
- exe34 2y ago> a large mammal lifespan of 70 years is sufficient to generate as many good random mutations as needed to grow a new leg thankfully, nobody is claiming that happens. i can explain more, but there's the issue of my fees. £200,000 seems reasonable, given how dumb you are.