David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, February 18, 2020, 19:10 (1738 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I do to. 'Beneath His advance notice' comes from my concept that God sets major processes in motion, as in major weather patterns, but resultant tornadoes appear as as result, not directly due to Him.

dhw: I will take this as meaning that he either preprogrammed or dabbled every environmental change that accompanied every new life form. The only problem that remains is that if you regard Chixculub as a dabble, he obviously didn’t preprogramme it, which means he had not planned everything in advance. ... Please give us your own theory as to why he would intervene with a dabble if he knew from the very start exactly what he wanted and exactly how to get it.

I have proposed preprogramming as the general approach God used. Setting major patterns would fit that idea. It might result in minor correction dabbles, but all of this is guess work. I view God as totally in charge with goals to reach through evolution. Just how is guesswork,and you spot real objections, which simply goes to show that guessing about God is fraught with problems, as I keep warning you about your humanizing

dhw: Now please tell me why, if it is possible that he has some human attributes, a theory endowing him with some human attributes is out of bounds. And tell me why, for instance, it is less human to be a control freak than to be an interested onlooker.

DAVID: Just remember, all guesses, all logical at a human level.

dhw: So tell me why these different logical human guesses should not be taken just as seriously as your own illogical human guess.

Since when can guesses be serious?

dhw: The rest of your post continues to flog the dead horse of humanization, with added appeals to the authority of a philosopher and theologian named Adler, highly respected by the Catholic Church, who has nothing to say about those parts of your theory that defy logic.

DAVID: Only your lack of understanding how think about God gets in the way.

dhw:Sorry, but who decides how one should think about God? Why is it a lack of understanding if one looks for and finds a possible God’s possible human attributes as logical explanations for his possible handling of evolution? Why is it more “understanding” to impose an illogical combination of purpose, nature and method on your God and then to tell us we shouldn’t try to explain it? Perhaps what you really mean is that my logical way of thinking about God gets in the way of my accepting your illogical way of thinking about him.

I have warned you. Your guesses about God's reasons are guesses ,without substance.

Under: "A virus with unrelated new genes"
DAVID: Can this virus be part of common descent?

DAVID: over 90% of genes are entirely new, and the remainder only distantly related to known genes. Where did this come from? Did it invent itself or was it designed. Evolution gets stranger and stranger.

dhw: More to the point, perhaps, is why you think your God would have separately designed this particular virus when all he wanted to do was design H. sapiens.

DAVID: Simple: all part of a required econiche. Like the turtles it is echoniches all the way down, although with evolution it is all the way up.

dhw: Yes, all life obviously depends on balanced econiches, and when the balance changes, the econiche changes. Nothing whatsoever to do with your theory that all econiches were designed to cover the time until your God could produce H. sapiens.

Without econiches, no food supply for life to continue

Under "Reintroduction of bison":
DAVID: Makes the same point as always. Econiches are extremely important for life to exist in diverse proportions.

dhw: Yes indeed, the same obvious point as always. Nothing whatsoever to do with your anthropocentric theory of evolution.

God decided to evolve humans. God, in charge, knew He had to create a bush of econiches to supply evolving life with the energy needed. Surely you can understand that logic. Try and accept that logic by starting with the proposition of God is in charge, and I am not reading his mind as to purpose, but requirements of a plan.