I wonder if this is related to the brain phenomena that suggests that some 'connections' between brain regions are nonlocal in nature, perhaps through EM resonance, for instance. As for proteins, the proteins of a certain tissue type forming an organ behave in harmony with each other - kind of like the starlings? It's as if the community of proteins is in constant communication with each other. When they are behaving in harmony and acting out their function (which requires harmony), they are under the higher-order influence of a unifying 'soul' or logos. When that organizing/coordinating principle departs, the proteins' behavior becomes disharmonized. Order leaves and chaos takes over, i.e. death.
There are multiple levels of coordination that are required: between proteins within individual cells, between proteins in separate but related cells, between different tissue types and entire physiological systems. Each system has to be internally coordinated and coordinated with all other systems, horizontally and vertically. I wonder if the 'protein-antenna' also have something to do with the higher-level coordinations taking place in the organism, or if there is something more going on over and above protein-level stuff. Maybe it's more like this: all different types of proteins have a different 'signature' - and the unique combination of all those signatures creates a higher-order meta-signature. The individual logos or soul is like a mirror reflection of that signature, coordinating all parts to act as one.
There's an analogy here to the First Sight stuff I've been summarizing in the Carpenter thread. Pre-sensory information is vague and only potentially true, e.g. the vague pre-sensory image of a potentially predatory animal. It must be confirmed by the senses to become knowledge, otherwise it will just remain as a possibility. (This is why it's important to be skeptical of channeled information - it hasn't been made knowledge through experience.) The act of conscious 'cognitive closure' solidifies it as knowledge and contributes to the formation of deeply held beliefs (conscious AND unconscious) about the nature of reality, from simple things like 'things fall down' to complex physical and psychological behaviors and patterns. In the same way, theories and speculations must remain just that: possible explanations of concrete events. But when they are matched with actual data from the real world, this helps to create a deep belief about the nature of objective reality. And the more you KNOW about objective reality, the better you are able to navigate it (i.e., the more 'power' or free will you have). This is why you can trust some channeled information - if your own efforts to gain knowledge lock it in.
I'm not sure they necessarily wipe out the bad designs - that's what natural selection is for. Bad designs will die out on their own given new environmental conditions (climate, chemical, new and better life-forms, etc.) in which they can't fulfill whatever life purpose they are designed for. If an overall design doesn't work, it will die out and won't be used as the basis for new forms. If parts of it seem useful, they can be incorporated into a new design. And if the design works fine as it is, then great - no intervention necessary. That's why the horseshoe crab, the sponge, and certain bacteria are still around hundreds of millions of years later. They still fulfill their function, and the group souls learning in those forms still find them appropriate for their own soul/learning purposes. Later in the session, L mentioned this in regard to the slime world, for example, and how some carries over into the next 'world'. It may even be that there are certain prerequisite stages for later stages. Like, in order to get world B, you have to let world A run its course first. There may be an overall pattern to the development of 2D worlds - especially if 3D forms are relatively stable across worlds.
Not necessarily. If families are the taxonomically lowest directly created forms, then genera and species are the results of degradative mutation and natural selection. The Canidae family includes wolves, coyotes, foxes, jackals, dingoes, and dogs. It's still possible dogs are specifically designed, though - Behe seems open to the possibility that some genera and species might be, even if it's rarer than devolution. Plus the taxonomy system isn't necessarily perfect - more of a general approximation perhaps.
I love this bit! ;)
I think this last bit is very important, specifically the part about it being freely given AND freely received. One of the problems of the ID camp is that I don't think they give enough credit to the power of organisms themselves - organisms are the playthings of an omnipotent God and not much more than that. That is, they don't give ideas about what the implications might be for what we might call the 2D group souls using all these body plans. What 5D life-plans are they carrying out? What are their general purposes? What is the nature of the evolution of their group consciousness?
Darwinists see the sole push for evolution in random changes to physical forms. Any evolution of consciousness (to the extent that they'd agree such a thing exists) is solely a product or accident of physical evolution.
I haven't heard any ID people talk about their views on the evolution of consciousness. Presumably they could go either way, agreeing with the Darwinists that higher consciousness is a result of the more developed body (designed by God), or that the new consciousness is itself created and 'gifted' by God.
My tentative thoughts on the matter are that physical evolution simply doesn't exist, but that evolution of consciousness does, both in the thoughts of the designers as they learn about life, and in the learning of the organisms and its effects on their own consciousness. Both 'sides' of the exchange are important. New forms engineered from above can only be implemented in the right conditions - in terms of biology and consciousness. Previous forms need to exist, which are the material for new innovations. And the consciousness of the 2D beings themselves needs to be 'ready' for a new experience. I'm not sure how that works yet. In general terms, maybe an experimental life form gains experience over millions of years, learning the ropes of interacting in the world, what works, what doesn't, what is important, what isn't. After all that time, there is an implicit wish and readiness for something new and higher. A 'call' is sent out to the higher densities, at the same time that those higher densities are planning the next form of experience to meet with the developmental needs of the consciousness in question.
