David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, November 03, 2019, 11:20 (14 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: 1) You believe that your God specially designed every single new life form, lifestyle and natural wonder in the history of life.
2) His one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens.
3) He decided to delay fulfilling that purpose for 3.X billion years and therefore had to design the whole preceding bush of life in order to cover the time he had decided to take.
4) You have no idea why he decided to delay fulfilling his purpose for 3.X billion years.

dhw: This theory, according to you, is not illogical so long as “one does not apply human reasoning" to it.

DAVID: There is no need to apply human reasoning if His works are accepted as the known history.

The “known history” which we can all accept is the great bush of life, with H. sapiens as the latest and most complex branch. If we accept that this is God’s work, it is your interpretation of how and why he did this work which constitutes points 1, 2, and 3, and this combination of fixed beliefs – not the history – is what you admit is contrary to human reason.
dhw: You have repeatedly told us that your God is in total control, and that he decided to take (not had to take) 3.X billion years, and you say “I have no idea why God decided to evolve humans over time”. According to you, it was this incomprehensibe decision which meant he “had to” design the whole preceding bush of non-human life forms, lifestyles and natural wonders (“establish the necessary food supply”) to “cover the time”. No distortion.

DAVID: I've admitted I do not know if He was forced to make that decision, but He decided. It is incomprehensible only to you, with your use of human logic, not God's.

According to you, the decision is not illogical provided we do NOT apply human logic, and so unless you claim to be divine, it is incomprehensible to you. (That is why you have “no idea” why he would have made this decision.)

DAVID: Adler does not discuss methods of evolution, only that we are God's purpose. My theory is a distillate of many sources.

So no point in citing Adler as a supporter of your humanly incomprehensible and illogical theory.

I have transferred the next exchanges from “Evolution of Language”, since they have nothing to do with language.

DAVID: You are skipping over my point that the needs of a new species have to be anticipated in planning for the design of the species. The designer had to know in advance ears were necessary for the moth's like style. If moths had arrived without ears and couldn't pick up evidence of predators, they would not have survived. Survival needs have to be planned in advance. Species appear abruptly after gaps, no time given for modifications, remember Gould's point.

dhw: I have repeatedly answered this point on this thread and elsewhere! If you accept common descent, then moths with ears did not appear out of the blue – moths with ears descended from pre-moths without ears, just as whales descended from pre-whales without flippers.

DAVID: And what we are arguing is how did the adaptations happen. Speciation is a black box. You want the nebulous idea of cell committees with the ability to design. I know only minds design.

We are arguing about your insistence (now bolded above) that every innovation had to be planned in advance of the environmental changes it was meant to cope with. The rest of my post is devoted to explaining that moth ears and whale flippers would have evolved IN RESPONSE to new needs and not IN ANTICIPATION of them
.
dhw : No doubt many pre-eared moths did NOT survive either. That was why ears became necessary. Pure common sense, illustrated millions of times over by the history of life. No need for your “magic” - though highly selective (because most species have died out) - crystal ball process which you are so fixated on.

DAVID: Total non sequitur! Of course ears became necessary. The issue between us remains. How did that happen? Moths with ears are a slightly different new species, which requires design. Your answer for speciation is not my answer. As you have kindly noted my 'Atheist Delusion' book is a very strong argument for design.

Once more, you have forgotten that the issue here, as bolded, is your ANTICIPATION theory (as opposed to RESPONSE). As for how speciation happens, nobody knows. Your theory is that your God either dabbled or foresaw every future environmental change and/or problem, and preprogrammed the first cells with every response and/or solution, (though approx. 90% of species would be left to die). I propose (theistic version) that he gave cells the intelligence to work out their own designs. The rest of your post repeats and dismisses my theory, and glosses over the incredible complexities of your own by simply insisting that “only minds design”, which is not the issue between us.

Same point on the thread “Biological complexity: managing oxygen levels”: you insist that ants were preprogrammed 3.8 billion years ago to march and build bridges, and I propose that they worked it out when conditions required them to do so, and then passed their successful strategies on to succeeding generations.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum