Natures wonders: walking fish have not evolved (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, January 24, 2020, 11:38 (1763 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Environmental change may have made it necessary for survival, or may have offered new opportunities to improve chances of survival. I like Raup’s interpretation, and if we follow the theory of cellular intelligence, what we have is that some cell communities are capable of adapting, some are even capable of innovating, and the rest are unlucky enough not to have the intelligence (though luck may also play a vital role, largely depending on the nature of the environmental change) that would enable them to adapt or innovate. If we follow the Davidian interpretation, those that die are lucky enough to have been preprogrammed 3.8 billion years ago to come into existence, but unlucky enough not to have been preprogrammed to survive the new conditions.

DAVID: Or the Davidian view also states that God is on watch and helps along the way in dabbles.

dhw: Sorry, I should have added your belief that your God pops in to fiddle with anatomies or hold classes in strategies etc.I note that you have not commented on my explanation for the advances.

DAVID: My usual answer: environmental change if not uncomfortable or dangerous (Raup) doesn't cause anything to happen to advance evolutionary adaptations. We do not know what causes animals to make new species if there are no pressures, since they are not required to change.

You persistently ignore the second point, which I have now bolded for you. If a different environment offers better opportunities for survival (e.g. water instead of land or, to follow one theory relating to the Cambrian, an increase in oxygen levels), this could trigger innovation. But of course nobody knows what causes speciation, and that is why we have different theories.

DAVID: Your view of God thinks He wanted to set everything up and just watch, with no further participation, a sort of a Deist view.

dhw: Do I really need to keep repeating that your God may have done the implanting? I don’t have a fixed view of God, but yes, Deism is one possible view that fits in perfectly with the history of life. Even you have told us that your God is hidden. Do you have any logical grounds for rejecting the Deist theory?

DAVID: To be honest, yes. I assume if He did all that creating He'd like to follow the results and as I view God as supremely purposeful, it is most likely He is still actively interested in what He produced. To do it and leave seems odd.

He might be watching the show unfold, but not wishing to interfere. Not logical?