Zachriel: If a genie *consistently intervened*

A genie? You can't help yourself, can you.

You haven't shown any *plausible* mechanism that would do this.

Right. I haven't posited a genetic specification, only a functional specification. Remember, this is Telic Thoughts. We're allowed to think along those lines.

At any rate, nothing you've said, and no evidence contradicts the idea, as you've said. Or else you're using a definition of contradiction that I'm unaware of.

kornbelt888: Not if any change to it would result in failure to reproduce.

If a genie *consistently intervened* to prevent reproduction in those with unwanted variations of the conserved genes, then they would tend to be conserved. You haven't shown any *plausible* mechanism that would do this.

kornbelt888: What evidence contradicts the idea that dual purpose mechanisms could have been responsible for preserving sets of latent genes across deep time for the purpose of later function?

Zachriel: Because the dual purpose mechanism would be just as subject evolutionary change as any other biological mechanism.

Not if any change to it would result in failure to reproduce.

Zachriel: There is no advantage to such a mechanism, and whatever benefit you think it might have, it would still have it if decoupled from the protected regions.

It couldn't do that if it would result in failure to reproduce.

Zachriel: You might start by specifying a goal.

How about human like entities. Other than front loading the DNA with fail safe mechanisms that would either conserve various latent structure thru deep time or utterly fail to reproduce, what else could have been done, other than periodic periodic intervention by the designer?

Zachriel: Without actual evidence, that is not necessarily the case. You would want to examine the actual case.

True. But this is Telic Thoughts, and speculating about how a designer of life might plausibly accomplish certain goals is fair game. If that's not your bag, then fine.

We already have a good idea the content of dinosaur DNA. It more closely resembles a chicken than a human.

I wonder if they tasted like chicken.

kornbelt888: What evidence contradicts the idea that dual purpose mechanisms could have been responsible for preserving sets of latent genes across deep time for the purpose of later function?

Because the dual purpose mechanism would be just as subject evolutionary change as any other biological mechanism. There is no advantage to such a mechanism, and whatever benefit you think it might have, it would still have it if decoupled from the protected regions.

kornbelt888: If you were an life engineer assigned the task of designing a bio system such as earth's, with the goal of human like beings, how would you do it without such a mechanism?

You might start by specifying a goal. By far the largest biomass on Earth are prokaryotes. Perhaps life was made for bacteria, and humans are just kept around as habitat.

kornbelt888: However, if such a mechanism were found, over deep time, it would strongly suggest a telic source.

Without actual evidence, that is not necessarily the case. You would want to examine the actual case.

kornbelt888: What if all the genes responsible for human intellect and other talents were found latent in dinosaur DNA?

We already have a good idea the content of dinosaur DNA. It more closely resembles a chicken than a human.

Zachriel: It seems far from a plausible mechanism,

Why? If you were an life engineer assigned the task of designing a bio system such as earth's, with the goal of human like beings, how would you do it without such a mechanism?

nor empirically predictive.

Perhaps. However, if such a mechanism were found, over deep time, it would strongly suggest a telic source. What if all the genes responsible for human intellect and other talents were found latent in dinosaur DNA? Or something more primitive? And also found was dual purpose DNA that preserved those latent genes? How would you explain that setup?

Zachriel: Your speculations are … apparently contradicted by [the evidence].

That's a statement worth making.

If I were a life engineer assigned the task of designing a bio system such as earth's, with the goal of human like beings, it's difficult to imagine how the job could get done without many such subsystems operating.

What evidence contradicts the idea that dual purpose mechanisms could have been responsible for preserving sets of latent genes across deep time for the purpose of later function?

There is nothing wrong with speculation. Nor is there anything wrong with pointing out flaws in your ideas. Your speculations are not only unsupported by the evidence, but apparently contradicted by it. That means you need to modify your ideas, or find supporting evidence.

Zachriel: One hundred percent negative selection should be easy to detect.

kornbelt888: Over deep time with the evidence available? I don't think so.

How inconvenient.

kornbelt888: I'm positing a plausible mechanism. Worthy of a prediction. Something to look for. Time will tell.

It seems far from a plausible mechanism, nor empirically predictive. But you're free to speculate. You're even free to look for evidence. Let us know what you find.

Zechriel: So, any mutation to the region would cause the organism to cease reproducing.

Right.

One hundred percent negative selection should be easy to detect.

Over deep time with the evidence available? I don't think so. And the mechanism could be single purpose now, subject to much variation after the intended variation was accomplished.

Do you have any evidence?

Not yet. I'm positing a plausible mechanism. Worthy of a prediction. Something to look for. Time will tell. A fitting discussion for Telic Thoughts.