Evolution: gaps are very real (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, July 03, 2017, 13:05 (2701 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I don't know why ID scientists should be regarded as having a monopoly on the truth. In any case, do they really agree with your 3.8 billion-year-old divine computer programme for the whole of evolution? And if Shapiro is their favourite as well as yours, why would they and you resolutely dismiss his belief that cells are sentient, cognitive, decision-making beings?
DAVID: I think they have the right approach to biological truth. they can make some DNA changes, hat is all which appear sentient, but are not.

Of course you think that anyone who agrees with you has the right approach. You have no way of knowing if something that appears sentient is or is not sentient (plus cognitive, plus decision-making), and therefore at the very least you should respect Shapiro’s conclusions.

DAVID: Saltations are large changes in form and function. There is no way to create them with coordination of function without advanced planning. You may imagine it, but I view it as impossible.
dhw: You agreed on June 30...that your God could produce saltations at any time without advanced planning, but by July 1 it is impossible, even for God.
DAVID: I just expanded on my concept of saltations for your edification. Pre-planning is always required and I assumed you would understand that from my previous explanations of understanding the implications of the future forms and functions.

I am aware that your concept of saltations requires future planning, and am also aware that after much vacillation you decided that your God’s powers were not limited. Now apparently he is incapable of intervening (“dabbling”) in order to restructure organisms in response to environmental changes (i.e. without advanced planning). There is no consistency in your arguments.

dhw: The fact that you have blind faith in your hypothesis is no more of a justification for it than Dawkins announcing his blind faith that random mutations and natural selection explain the whole of life.
DAVID: So be it. I view my conclusions as logical.
dhw: Earlier quotes: “If it’s God’s method, it does not have to make sense” and “It doesn’t have to make sense if one is blindly faithful.” But despite the fact that your theory doesn’t make sense and you must rely on blind faith, you regard it as logical.
DAVID: That's faith for you!

I have no problem with faith, but I do have a problem if someone claims that blind faith in a senseless theory is logical.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum