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

by dhw, Saturday, May 02, 2015, 08:26 (3492 days ago) @ David Turell

Please note: I am switching threads, as this discussion concerns Evolution v Creationism. For exaptations, see “Evolution: a different view”.-DAVID: How do you know God has a learning curve? No theologian would claim that, why should you?
dhw: ...frankly, I'm surprised that someone who claims to think for himself should be so dependent on what theologians claim.
DAVID: I'm not claiming to be dependent on theologians in the comment I gave. Other than the possibility of Whitehead, whom I have not studied, I've not heard that God has a learning curve and I don't know if He does or not. Why did you twist my comment?-Your “why should you?” appeared to be challenging my right to go against the views of the theologians you know. Since apparently neither of us regard theologians as having the exclusive right to formulate hypotheses about God, I can't see the point of your challenge!
 
dhw: ... you have categorically stated God's exact role in evolution, and I am not convinced. ... But when your theory is shown to be riddled with problems, you tell me not to bother
DAVID: The problem is I liked my theory, and don't accept your problems with it. I've said I accept the probability of an evolutionary process because the appearance of organisms from simple to complex over time is strongly suggestive of evolution. That doesn't mean I understand how a guided evolutionary process works, but that is what I think it is.-It's always a problem if you like a theory but can't fit it to the facts. By preprogramming I understand that God fixed the first cells to pass down all the innovations for the next 3.7 billion years. By dabbling I understand that he intervened to make changes as and when. That is the explanation you have given about “how a guided evolutionary process works” (plus an IM that can only function if it is preprogrammed or dabbled with). Perhaps you are now willing to discard that very concrete explanation in favour of an agnostic “don't know”? -dhw: I wonder what the evolutionary pressure/reason was for the 99% of extinct species, for the whale, for the weaverbird, and for the duck-billed platypus.-DAVID: I don't know and I don't think it matters.-You wrote that there was "no evolutionary pressure/reason for us to be here", which you seem to think supports your theory that God created life for the purpose of producing humans. I am pointing out that there was also no evolutionary pressure for the whale, weaverbird or duck-billed platypus to be here, so you can hardly use the lack of evolutionary pressure as evidence that humans are God's purpose.