The Dodo Problem (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, November 27, 2010, 17:48 (4919 days ago) @ dhw


> It's worth repeating that your interpretation of the evolutionary process ... a single mechanism automatically developing into all its branches ... fits in perfectly with the atheist scenario minus a UI. Your original mechanism is designed, theirs comes about by chance. It has to be a possibility. But there is a huge gap between life "popping up everywhere", and being SURE life would survive specifically in order to CREATE US (= the UI's scattergun approach). If our brains tell us there are easier methods, but there may be a reason we don't understand as yet, why dismiss alternative theories to your own that require no such reason? Evolution proceeded by shooting out branches in all directions. This may be because God was trying different things to see what would happen (= experimenting and improvising), or because he had a particular aim in mind but wasn't sure how best to achieve it (= experimenting). -You miss my point. I believe that the genome is marvelously designed to take life into any region, to respond to any environmental change, geologic alteration, temperature change, atmospheric change, etc. Once set up there is no direct evidence of experimentation. The genome in the amoeba shows the same basic steps as human genomes. Branches in the evolutionary tree would show some tampering in the genomes, some odd directionality, if your proposal of experimentation existed. The genomes are built to experiment on their own from the beginning, to adapt as necessary. Chance is involved only in the chance appearance of challenges. God sits and watches.-> Both alternatives "fit what we know now". There is no gap in either of them, they explain precisely how God might have arrived at us humans through "branching", and therefore they require no unknown reason. They merely require an adjustment to your insistence that God had everything worked out from the very beginning. My apologies for being as stubborn as you!-Just as stubborn: No they don't both fit. Chance cannot arrive at the complexity of life we now see. The molecular machines of life, I presented one recently here, are beyond chance, IMHO, and I am not humble about it. And Behe is touring England at the moment conquering all in his ddbates. I've listened to one so far. The Humanists are losing; George and the others just don't know it yet. If goerge is watching, some of the UK humanist blogs won't come up on my computer. I wish they would. It is always mind expanding to listen in on the opposition reasoning.