Cellular intelligence: (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, January 10, 2022, 18:20 (846 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: I have never said he wished us evil! You dismiss my alternative theories because they “humanize” God, and because your God is “kindly” – as if that did not “humanize" him!

It is not characterizing words that humanize. It is the way you propose actions God might take or want as free-for-all and experimenting into the future.

DAVID:… you have created a God who invites chaos.

dhw: All theories are “unproven”, including the very existence of God. Intelligent organisms would explain why there isn’t chaos, and I do not “turn to God” but I include God as a possible first cause. I am an agnostic, not an atheist.

Intelligent organisms can't plan for future speciation, which is the only way to explain the gaps in fossils as Cambrian or flowering plant bloom

DAVID: Past food for past organisms. Dodging again by slicing and dicing evolution.

dhw: What does “slicing and dicing” mean? You keep agreeing that past food was not for present humans, and so how can it and all the past organisms that also had no connection with humans have been part of God’s one and only goal of designing humans plus food? Over and over again you have told me to ask God to explain your theory because you can’t. So why do you keep defending it?

You keep ignoring my point God chose to evolve us from bacteria. All of evolution connected.
Your constant illogical complaint slices it into disparate parts.

Antibiotic resistance
DAVID: In the real God's reality, it is required by necessary diversification to form sustaining ecosystems for the food supply. So I view bad infectious diseases as unescapable bad luck, not my God's doing.

dhw: Do you know the “real” God? Of course defence systems are required if organisms are to survive. Any intelligent organism will know that it has to defend itself! I don’t know why your all-powerful God would design a system in which he is powerless to stop “bad luck”! It makes more sense to me that an all-powerful God would simply design the system he wanted to design.

DAVID: Finally!! Yes, God designed the system He wanted that He knew would work.

Finally!! We agree. He didn’t “have to” design it with errors that he didn’t want and couldn’t correct, and the diseases were not “bad luck”. He got exactly what he wanted, and it works the way he wanted it to work. Perfectly in keeping with your belief that he is all-powerful and all-knowing. And you don’t need to draw any “humanized” conclusions about whether his nature is “kindly” or not. Finally!!

Wrong 'finally'. An all-knowing God knew which system for life would work and used it recognizing errors were probable. The edit systems He added work at nano-second speed so over trillions of reactions per second are correct, and errors rare.

Biofilms
dhw: Please tell us what attributes convince you that humans are autonomously intelligent.

DAVID: Observed attributes from outside the organisms are comparisons, not proof of origin.

dhw: We are not talking about “proof of origin”. I asked you what human attributes convince you that humans are autonomously intelligent. Why can’t you give a straight answer?

The straight answer, you know, is we can only observe outward appearances of cells actions which I believe are automatic. We have free will using huge, highly complex brains.

Zebrafish inner ear
DAVID: My guesses about God are necessarily couched in human terms, but that does make my view of Him humanized as you weakly attempt to do.

dhw:So your “human terms” like “kindly” and “interested” and “enjoy” are not human, and mine – like “interested” and “enjoy” – are.

DAVID: Silly. All the terms we both use are human. There are no specific 'God' terms.

dhw: So please stop dismissing my alternative theories on the grounds that I use the same human terms as you do – though I have never suggested that he is “kindly”.

As above: "It is not characterizing words that humanize. It is the way you propose actions God might take or want as free-for-all and experimenting into the future.