David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, November 03, 2019, 15:46 (14 days ago) @ dhw

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.

It is not 'contrary to human reason'. I simply accept His works without question.

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.

dhw: 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.)

I'm sorry your object to my reasonable approach, not to question God's thinking.


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


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.

dhw: 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

How does a new species survive if problems are not prepared for in advance? The predators would have a feast and the newly arrived guys would be gone.

.
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.

dhw: 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.

That only minds design is exactly the issue. Advance design is required for new species to handle new problems


dhw: 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.

Your view is possible. The bridge study said each ant always did the same thing. Hold on the neighbors.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum