David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, December 19, 2019, 11:07 (1799 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Evolution is a stepwise process. It had to take the time history shows. Evolution is a journey to a final goal.

dhw: Nobody will disagree that evolution has taken time, but the stepwise process led to a huge variety of non-human species extant and (most tellingly) extinct, and there is every chance that the stepwise process will eventually reverse itself and the planet will finish up with nothing but bacteria. Many religions do believe in a final goal, but for some reason your final goal stops with the arrival of you and me. You are happy to go on and on about God’s purposefulness, but you are not prepared to discuss his purpose for specially designing us. This in itself is odd. And you are still as stuck as ever with the absurdity of an all-powerful, all-knowing God who had only one “final goal” but decided to spend 3.X billion years not designing the only thing he really wanted to design.

DAVID: God's motives and purposes are all up for discussion, but since He hasn't told us His reasoning, it all will be guess work. We've done that before and covered most of the possibilities.

But you cling to the only guess that defies all human logic.

DAVID: I strongly feel we are the endpoint, since as top predator we control the flow of life on Earth. There are rare minor reversals in evolution when devolution has been noted. Yet the strong flow of evolution is more and more complexity Note this article about the future:
David's theory of evolution Part Two; more support

Already a misleading sub-heading. The only support for your theory that you have offered so far is Adler’s emphasis on our uniqueness, which I have never disputed. Nor do I dispute any of the following:

https://phys.org/news/2019-12-fossils-future-humans-domestic-animals.html
QUOTES: "As the number and technology of humans has grown, their impact on the natural world now equals or exceeds those of natural processes, according to scientists."
"He and Karen Koy of Missouri Western State University report that the number of humans and their animals greatly exceeds that of wild animals.”

DAVID: Evolution is over, unless we change a bit. You may want to alter your view in bold.

Why should I change my view that the process gave rise to a huge variety of non-human species extant and extinct? It is blatantly obvious that we are the dominant species. That has nothing to do with your theory…off we go again…that your all-powerful, all-knowing God started out with the sole purpose of producing us, but inexplicably decided to delay doing so for 3.X billion years and therefore had to design 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human forms, econiches etc. in order to cover the time he had decided to take before pursuing his one and only goal. If you persist in focusing on only one aspect of your theory, I shall have to persist in repeating the WHOLE theory in order to show its illogicality.

DAVID: God uses logic as we do. But we cannot know for sure His motives and purposes.

Of course we can’t, but your view of his purpose and method requires nothing illogical “if one does not apply human reasoning to the actual history”.

DAVID: You constantly humanize God as you try to analyze His thoughts.

You have agreed that your God “very well could think like us”, and once again you are claiming that he uses logic as we do, but his logic is incomprehensible to us, and so we mustn’t question your interpretation of his purpose and method because if we do, we will humanize him. So your God uses logic as we do, but his logic cannot have anything in common with our human logic! You are tying yourself in knots.

DAVID (under “Human evolution”): Like the Hobbits, isolation seems to have helped them to exist until more recent times. For me it calls into question Gould's punc-inc theory that isolation produces evolution. And think, they lived in the time of H. habilis, Neanderthal, and early H. sapiens. A bush of Homos, just like the bush of life. Evolution follows a bushy pattern.

As usual, you ignore the whole problem of why your all-powerful, all-knowing God, whose sole purpose was to produce H.sapiens, should have produced a bush of Homos, especially those that lived in isolation!