David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, March 04, 2020, 12:39 (209 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Your usual humanizing attempts. Adler's "Difference of Man and the Difference it Makes" clearly gives us God's existence and purpose.

dhw: Once again you hide behind Adler, although you admit that he does NOT cover your own theory of evolution, and you agree that your God probably has thought patterns and emotions similar to ours, but you dismiss any theory that suggests a thought pattern or emotion similar to ours.

DAVID: Weird empty argument. Adler is a basis for my thoughts. He has nothing to do with my thinking based on his presentations, so of course he doesn't comment about my theory. I certainly dismiss your humanizing. and know we cannot know God's reasons for His purposes/choices, but you love to guess. Have fun!

You hide behind Adler to justify your theory, then you say it’s weird if I point out that Adler has nothing to do with your theory, and apparently it’s weird because Adler has nothing to do with your theory! And yes, you dismiss my humanizing theories because although you agree that God probably has thought patterns similar to ours, we can’t ”know” the truth, and so in some weird way the fact that we can’t know the truth justifies your sticking to your own theory, which I shan’t repeat in all its illogical detail.

dhw: I asked you the question you asked me: Why can’t God decide to do it his way, not yours? No answer.

DAVID: God does it His way, obviously.

So why can’t “His way” be one of my alternative ways instead of your way?

dhw: So God steps in to help some life forms ... and pure luck is just a matter of whether species are or are not among the deliberately chosen ones. I wonder why you bothered to quote Raup in the first place, as I very much doubt if that is what he meant!

DAVID: Raup said species disappeared because they didn't adapt or couldn't. I used his Darwinesque information to guide my thinking. From my view God did not help them.

I’d be amazed if anyone disagreed with Raup, but let’s drop it.

DAVID: So you want a sudden stick by one lucky fish who showed others to copy him? Or he luckily inoculated a bunch of females with his new mutation(s)? Design is easier to comprehend.

dhw: So did your God give a sudden “stick” to one lucky fish who showed others or luckily inoculated females etc. etc. Or did he round up all the pre-suckerfish and stick on stickers? Your question applies to every single new species: how did each one start, and how did the changes spread? We don’t know. But it is clear that organisms have a way of passing on strategies and solutions to problems once they have been discovered or invented. You need only think of bacteria learning to counter modern medicines. You have given us two examples among your Nature’s Wonders:[…]

dhw: So do you think your God went round siphoning gases into all the pre-golden rods and sticking yellow spots on all the pre-yellow spiders?

DAVID: You know full well God is my designer.

That is no answer. You sneered at my explanation of the process by which suckerfish may have evolved their stickability. So please explain how you think your God did it. (We can skip the golden rod and the yellow spider if you like.)

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum