autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, February 22, 2018, 12:37 (543 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You've simply described evolution in your first comment and agreed that balance of nature has continued naturally throughout evolution. Of course they are intimately related and humans arrived at the pinnacle. Try accepting it at face value. it is an obvious anthropocentric story.

dhw: Balance of nature has CHANGED throughout evolution, according to which species survive and which do not! When one species goes extinct, it affects other species – chain reaction. Yes, that is a simple evolutionary process which you have drawn attention to by quoting this article, and which applies whether there are humans or not. It has nothing to do with your theory that your God specially designed every species, lifestyle and natural wonder, and did so solely for the purpose of creating the brain of Homo sapiens.

DAVID: You keep ignoring the time evolution took to reach the sapiens. Divesity in nature supplies the food supply for all those years.

Cart before horse. Life has gone on for approx. 3.8 billion years and with a bit of luck may continue for a few more billion years, and regardless of what forms of life there are, were and will be, nature has supplied, does supply and will supply food until it stops supplying food. Nothing whatsoever to do with the hypothesis that God designed the weaverbird’s nest (times a few million other natural wonders) in order to produce the brain of Homo sapiens. May I suggest you drop this approach to your anthropocentric hypothesis and confine “balance of nature” to ecology, where you quite rightly point out the dangers human interference is posing to all forms of life.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum