DILEMMAS: A Response to DHW (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, November 17, 2014, 21:30 (3657 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: Since according to you the purpose of evolution was to produce humans, and the IM is capable of nothing more than “minor adaptations”, it follows that all species (broad sense) plus specially programmed “variations” like this one, plus a few million others, must be necessary for the existence of humans.-I think that is the case. See the Spetner review
> 
> dhw: So now we have the first cells preprogrammed with every single innovation leading from bacteria to humans, along with millions of Nature's Wonders.... To add to the improbability, Chicxulub was not preprogrammed after all, and so these programmes depended on chance coming up with the right environment. Luckily for us there wasn't a Chicxulub right at the start to destroy those first cells with all their programmes! I'm surprised that your God was/is such a gambler.-You appear to be describing Spetner's view. My own view is close to Spetner, but I've gone further than he has in theorizing about the IM (NREH)mechanisms and its abilities.-> dhw: Which is another way of saying that your dilemma lies in not knowing how much autonomy your God gave to the IM.-True. Perhaps it is better to follow Spetner and not guess as to how it works.
> 
> dhw: I look forward to your report on Spetner's ideas, and especially to hearing his alternative to common descent. -He is a believer in God, who thinks life was set up from the beginning to adapt from the basic 365 life forms quoted in the Talmud. He challenges the Darwinists to prove their 'chance' approach by producing probability calculations, which he states can be done with the currently available information about the structure of proteins. Matt should take notice, as he claims it can't be done.-
> dhw: Of course no-one knows, and that's why all the theories are “pipedreams”. Your divine, 3.7-billion-year computer programme for all those organs, wonders and species geared to us humans is as dreamy as any pipe-smoker has ever dreamt.-Spetner doesn't dream. He believes. Note that he clearly shows the scientific literature finds deletion of information with current adaptations. This means the information was there at the beginning of life. -> 
> dhw: If energy is the first cause, then clearly consciousness “somehow appeared and it came from energy” and the stream of contingent events “must start somewhere and somehow.” That's what the discussion is about: whether consciousness was always there, or emerged through some form of evolution. The fact that you “fully doubt” the latter does not make your beliefs any more rational or irrational than anyone else's.-I'm sorry, but for me it is irrational to think amorphous energy somehow by chance organized itself into a constructive consciousness.