An Alternative to Evolution: pt 2 (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, July 06, 2018, 10:50 (2331 days ago) @ David Turell

TONY: I will respond more fully when I am at a computer, but the two points that preclude evolution are the absence of new information and the deleterious effects of mutations. Sorry to be so brief, but responding by cell phone is horrible.
As a follow up point, though, evolution only makes sense if random chance is the only instigating force.

DAVID: Can you tell me why you do not consider theistic evolution run by God?

I posed the same question in my own post, and offered two alternatives to random chance: David’s God-directed form, and my intelligent cell theory, which also allows for God as the initial instigating force. If mutations are deliberately designed, they will not be deleterious. I don’t know what you mean by the “absence of new information”. The expression is far too vague for me. At one time there were no brains, penises, wings. I'd say they all required new information, but if the information was there from the beginning, and was simply used for new purposes, that still doesn't invalidate the idea that your God started with relatively simple organisms and progressively gave them new structures. That’s evolution and common descent. And if he endowed cells/cell communities with the autonomous intelligence to do their own inventing (much as we are endeavouring to endow robots with autonomous intelligence), once again we have an evolutionary theory that will explain the higgledy-piggledy history of life on earth and leaves out chance altogether, apart from the effects of environmental change (though that may also have been part of your God’s plan). I needn’t go into the non-theistic version here, since both you and David are committed theists and the discussion concerns evolution and not the existence of God.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I see you have posted a more detailed response, but I don't even have time to read it now! I'll get back to this tomorrow.