Evolution: development of the elephant trunk (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, October 27, 2018, 09:34 (2005 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I thought in theory evolution was to seek the best way to survive. then as I've noted why bother with this degree of complexity?

dhw: I thought that in Turellian theory, your God’s prime purpose was to produce the brain of Homo sapiens. So why bother with this degree of complexity?

DAVID: Exactly, whales and elephants are overly complex, but fill the need for diversity and a balance of nature.

There was no “need” for diversity, since bacteria have done very nicely without it, and if whales and elephants did not exist, or went extinct, you would simply have a different balance of nature.

QUOTE: "It should be recognized that the term 'ancestral proboscidians' refers to unknown and undocumented creatures which are assumed to have existed and evolved into various proboscidians which left fossil traces."

DAVID: the evolutionary history contains suppositions, a usual Darwin technique.

dhw: All attempted explanations of speciation contain suppositions. You suppose the existence of a God and of a divine 3.8-billion-year computer programme for all undabbled innovations, lifestyles and natural wonders. The pot calls the kettle black – a usual Turell technique.

DAVID: You know full well that Darwin is all untrue supposition and attack my theories instead of accepting the truth about Darwin.

“All untrue”? No, I don’t know that at all, and nor do you, since you believe in common descent. You and I both reject Darwin’s random mutations and gradualism, but that does not, in my view, lend any credibility to your own theory that 3.8 billion years ago your God preprogrammed every undabbled innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder, although his prime purpose was to produce the brain of Homo sapiens. But you would rather belittle Darwin than acknowledge that your own theory is full of unproven and unprovable suppositions.