David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, April 27, 2020, 13:05 (1669 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Crazy thought: all I am saying is God designs the new advanced species from the old designed ones. Will certainly look and act like common descent. […]

dhw: You have always emphasized that there were no predecessors for all the new Cambrian species – your prime example of separate speciation.

DAVID: The whole point all along was God did it, however weirdly you interpret me.

The whole point of our discussion is: God did what?

DAVID: […] Please accept it: God speciates either by modification of the previous, as in hominin brain growth or new inventions like the Cambrian.

So now that dabbling is out of favour, we have a 3.8-billion-year-old programme for common descent and separate creation. How could he preprogramme separate creation if there was nothing to carry the programme? Under "extinctions", you wrote:
DAVID: Raup claims in his book, all who lost had bad luck.

Two predictable questions for you, just to add to the mystery: 1) Do you think your God preprogrammed these extinctions (after all, you think dabbling would suggest he’d made a mistake, which would make him weak and human for you.) 2) If so, why do you think he deliberately programmed all these life forms and their extinction in the first place if the only life form he wanted was H. sapiens? Please don’t say it was so that they could eat one another until his H. sapiens programme switched itself on.

dhw: […] Do you really think we humans created all these patterns and emotions before your God knew anything about them?

DAVID: I'm sure He knows them, but may not use them as you do.

dhw:: “May not” allows for “may”, so the different alternatives should not be dismissed on grounds of “humanization”. And frankly, I can’t believe that, for instance, he would know about enjoyment if he’d never enjoyed anything.

DAVID: Silly retort. A God who created the universe and life knows fully about our emotions without having to experience them. It is just more humanizing on your part that you cannot seem to understand.

I’m sure he knows what we’re feeling, but he is supposed to have created these thought patterns and emotions in the first place! How the heck do you know that he never actually felt any of them? You “cannot seem to understand” that if your God probably/possibly has thought patterns and emotions and attributes similar to ours, as you believe, then maybe he has thought patterns, emotions and attributes similar to ours!

DAVID: […] we must recognize all we've got is guesswork.

dhw:[…] Of course it’s all guesswork, so why do you insist that we must obey Mr Adler and not discuss God’s probably/possible thought patterns etc.

DAVID: Of course we can discuss them. but it is all guesswork or mental masturbation as
I view it, so lets discuss in non-human terms in deference to God's non-human status. And I'm allowed to follow Adler's teachings in doing that. He was one of must highly respected philosophers of religion in the 20th century.

But you are guessing that although your God has thought patterns similar to ours, he doesn’t! Why should I accept your guesses about his nature, purpose and method, just because you don’t want to discuss alternatives? And must all of us follow the views of people just because they are highly respected in their particular field? Darwin was and still is highly respected in his field. Would you accept that as a reason to follow him? Or would you prefer to test his arguments for yourself?

dhw: I have said he is not “totally” human. Please respect your own view that God probably/possibly has human thought patterns etc.

DAVID: But never using human purposes as we do. You can never ignore His level of purpose

How do you know his “level of purpose”? How do you know he doesn’t have “human” purposes? How do you know he never experiences the emotions you believe he created out of himself? You have just said that it’s all guesswork and “mental masturbation”! Why should your guesses and mental masturbation have priority over mine?

DAVID: God does not need to experiment.

How do you know?

David: […] Giant bush is giant food supply for a giant human population. Absolutely logical on God's part. Fits history, just as you say with your theories.

dhw: Once again you have conveniently forgotten to mention your belief that your all-powerful God chose to directly design giant bushes for all the extinct life forms that preceded humans over 3.X billion years, although all he wanted was us and our bush, and you have no idea why (except that they should eat one another to cover the time).'

DAVID: You've simply repeated what I write in your own tilted version of my theory[…] God runs evolution and prepares for the future He knows is coming.

I’ve repeated what you write because that is what makes your theory so illogical. Nothing tilted. I just want to know why you think 3.X billion years’ worth of specially preprogrammed extinct non-human life forms and bushes constituted preparation for the already preprogrammed, one and only species plus bushes that he actually wanted in the first place and, since he is all-powerful and in total control, could have produced any way he wanted.