Evolution: earliest mammals (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Thursday, November 21, 2019, 19:55 (306 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Your answer neatly avoids the issue of an obvious need for a designer.

dhw: Your comment neatly avoids my proposal that the article could be used to support the theory of an experimenting designer as opposed to a designer with a single purpose and the knowledge to achieve that purpose. It also neatly avoids the proposal that all the changes might be designed through the (possibly God-given) intelligence of the cell communities of which all organisms are composed.

DAVID: Again you revert to a 'possible' designer, when the evidence is clear a designer is required. How can there be obvious design without an actual designer?

dhw: You have again neatly avoided my proposal that the article supports the concept of an experimenting designer (as opposed to one who has a single purpose in mind and knows exactly how to achieve it), and after all these years, you still haven’t grasped the concept of multiple designers (possibly with God-given intelligence) in the form of the cells/cell communities of which all organisms are composed.

DAVID: My avoidance comes from my knowledge of your knowledge of my thoughts. I'll bother to repeat: Since we do not know God intimately, we cannot know if He experiments with His designs. My own feeling is that He is too knowledgeable and purposeful for that. I have totally grasped your theory that there are multiple designers and I have totally rejected that approach. For me God is the sole designer, and cells in a multicellular organism do not have any such capacity to design a species for the future.

dhw: You had accused me of avoiding the issue of the need for a designer. I did not avoid the issue, and offered two different hypotheses concerning design. The article could support the experimenting designer, but you have a fixed belief in a designer who knows everything in advance. The article also fits in with the hypothesis of cellular design, but you have a fixed belief that cells are incapable of “evolutionary novelty” (Shapiro). But it is pleasing to note your acknowledgement that we cannot know. All the more reason why we should keep an open mind.

And I have interpreted Shapiro for you, so you can realize he has only studied free-living bacteria looking for possible speciation mechanisms. Bacteria have reasonable change options so they can survive.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum