David's theory of evolution: James A. Shapiro's view (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, February 18, 2020, 18:08 (222 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I've told you from the beginning I am a theistic evolutionist. God creates our evolution. The ID folks don't like me, as I keep bringing in a God they like to hide. With your 'theistic hat' on you are the same.

dhw: Yes, I offer you various alternative views of theistic evolution, all of which you accept as being perfectly logical, in contrast to your own, which has your God specially designing every branch of the bush of life in order to specially design just one.

DAVID: Just as evolutionary history demonstrates, if one concludes God is in charge.

dhw: As above, evolutionary history does not demonstrate that God in charge designed every twig, and did so for the sole purpose of keeping life going until he designed the only thing he wanted to design.

I can certainly interpret it that way and your bold above makes no account of my initial step by viewing God as in charge and therefore He can do it any way He wishes. Take my view step by step and your misinterpretation is obvious, or are you blind to the possibility of a totally-in-charge God, doing as He wishes?

dhw: My answer is precisely the same as it has been ever since you raised the problem of gaps. That a major change in the environment (some folk think it was an increase in oxygen) triggered the Cambrian Explosion,

DAVID: […] The appearance of more oxygen only allows for the possibility that a new action might take place. It is not a required response unless some process is pushing it.

dhw: Of course. First we have the mechanisms for adaptation and innovation which are used to improve an organism’s chances of survival. Second we have an increase in oxygen. This triggers the mechanisms, which proceed to adapt and/or innovate in order to cope with or exploit the new environment. I don’t know why you refuse to recognize this as a possible explanation of the gaps. See also below.

Oxygen triggers nothing. It allows innovation to appear if the evolutionary mechanism wishes to take advantage of it. Your view assumes there is a drive to improve and complexify. But evolution is filled with examples of long periods of stasis. The push for survival is an immediate concern of all living animals animals, who have no concept of future needs in to drive DNA changes.

dhw: You don’t believe this theory, which is your right. I don’t accept the biblical version of separate creation, but you do. That is also your right.

DAVID: Exactly our difference.

dhw: How does this make you an evolutionist?

DAVID: Remember I view God as driving common descent.

dhw: But you keep harping on about the gaps and the Cambrian, which apparently involves new organisms out of nothing.

You always forget. God, in charge, ends the gaps by designing the new forms. He follows no time table schedule

dhw: You have even accepted what I wrote above: that you accept the biblical version of separate creation. So once and for all, taking the Cambrian as our test case: do you believe your God preprogrammed/dabbled existing organisms to produce the innovations, or do you believe the gaps denote separate creation?

I can't know, and you persist in guessing. Fo most of evolution Either/or is possible, design from what exists or as is obvious in the Cambrian, the special example, new design is required.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum