Evolution v Creationism: guided evolution? dhw? (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, April 25, 2015, 01:06 (3289 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Saturday, April 25, 2015, 01:11


> dhw: I will never get explanations for everything, but trying to make sense of the world we live in is the common ground that brought us together in the first place. ...we look at the facts and see to what extent these just-so stories (I prefer to call them hypotheses) fit in with what we know or think we know. That is the basis of all our discussions. You are prepared to attack other hypotheses on rational grounds, but you reject a rational approach to your own!-My problem is the primary fact that evolution appears to have produced conscious humans. I try to work rationally from that incredulous circumstance.
> 
> DAVID: You do 'want' an IM. You developed it to help you explain what none of us fully understand, innovation, so you don't have to accept a planning mind, the only thing that makes sense to me. Remember, we cannot ever prove that 'mind'.
> 
> dhw: The reason for developing it was indeed to explain innovation, but not so that I could reject a planning mind. You continue to ignore the fact that the hypothesis still allows for your God. What it rejects is the hypothesis that God planned the universe, life and evolution in order to produce humans. In other words, it does not accept your interpretation of your God's plans. However, you are probably right, that I do ‘want' it or at least I like it, because it appeals to my neutrality as the only explanation that can dispense with random mutations, explain the haphazard history of evolution, and at the same time leave open the question of whether God does or does not exist.-Thank you for finally admitting that my psychological analysis of your reasoning is on the mark. I know that your fence-sitting 'allows' for the possibility that God might be in change. After all, there are two sides to the fence. Articles I have submitted today go further in showing how much complexity surrounds the main genome code: We see transcription controls in RNA, histones, centrioles, telomeres, special proteins, etc. Even mitochondria with its own DNA from Mom, and centrioles from Dad. Will the never-ending complexity get complexer and complexer. Of course it will, and at some point require an admission that only a mind can plan the interlocking controls.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum