Explaining natural wonders (Animals)

by David Turell @, Wednesday, April 26, 2017, 18:37 (1001 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I don't understand your problem with the word 'guidelines'. God undoubtedly works at the knot level and the species level, Either by direct design or by supplying guidelines.

dhw; If you really can’t tell me what you mean by guidelines, you should not be surprised that I have a problem with them.

'Guidelines' obviously means there are instructions in the genome we haven't found, or God offers directions directly (by dabbling).


dhw: As always, you refuse to accept the possibility that organisms without a brain may be intelligent. I find it very hard to believe that your God would have taken the trouble to preprogramme this mechanism 3.8 billion years ago or give the sea urchin personal tuition, especially if all he wanted to do was design humans. I therefore look for an alternative.

He got to create humans by evolving them. Urchins were one step on the way. How else does evolution progress? The urchins weapons are too complex, and require intricate planning, well beyond some reflex neurons.


DAVID: My dabbling or pre-programming hypotheses are just as will o' the wisp as your auto inventions. My positive view is God guided evolution. I just cannot give a positive description of His methodology, so I guess. As you are guessing.
dhw: Yes, we can only hypothesize on ALL of these questions, all our answers are riddled with uncertainties, and so belief should not turn into dogma.
DAVID: My hypotheses fit reality as I see it. Yours fit your view. I'm on one side of the fence. I'll stay there while you will stay on it. Reality of our positions.

dhw: A perfectly fair comment. From now on, then, we shall probe each other’s hypotheses with due recognition that not a single one of them can possibly be “carved in stone” (your expression), and so we must allow for alternatives.

Agreed.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum