Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, September 02, 2020, 11:09 (1541 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Fine. We'll stop the circles. Keep ignoring Adler's argument.

dhw: I keep accepting the logic of Adler’s argument (man is special, and provides evidence of God’s existence and purpose), but you keep telling us he does not deal with your other premises, to which you can find no logical link. Please stop hiding behind Adler.

DAVID: Adler is my main argument for God's choice of goal,

But provides no support for your subsequent disconnected premises.

dhw: How can the ENTIRE bush of life (covering 3.8 billion years), 99% of which has now disappeared, supply us with our food? See above for “in charge”. Let us just accept that you believe dinosaurs are on the menu, and leave it at that.

DAVID: Silly. The past evolution leads to the present in usual thought.

dhw: I wonder how many people’s “usual thought” defines evolution as the direct design of all species, econiches, natural wonders etc., and insists that every single one was “part of the goal of evolving humans”, and that 3.X billion years’ worth of food supplies were directly designed to feed H. sapiens, although he did not yet exist.

DAVID: Isn't evolution a continuous process? God chose to evolve humans from bacteria as history shows.

Yes, it is a continuous process. The word “evolve” does not mean that your God directly designed every species, and for those of us who believe in common descent, history shows that every single multicellular organism in life’s history evolved from single cells. History does not show that the 99% of extinct multicellular organisms were directly designed as “part of the goal of evolving humans.”

DAVID: My guesses about God you just quoted were carefully couched as guesses and were offered to be polite in answering your requests for possible God feelings. Stated many times, remember? As for chickening out, you are weird!!! His purpose is the evolution of humans, again repeatedly stated.

dhw: A purposeful God must have a purpose for everything he does! Nobody can read his mind, but you use human logic to guess that his purpose for creating life was to create sapiens. What, then, was his purpose in creating sapiens? All of a sudden we mustn’t use human logic to guess, or to fit a guessed method to a guessed purpose. If you can use your human logic to provide a logical guess about purpose with no logical link to method, why can’t I use mine to provide logical guesses about linked purposes and methods? It seems we can’t close this thread yet!

DAVID: All our possible reasons for God producing sapiens are our human guesswork. But they are still guesses, for the sake of guessing. I've given you previous lists of my guesses, and I've read yours. All logical and non-provable. So why bother?

All our possible reasons for your God producing the universe and life are our human guesswork. Why did you bother to guess that his only purpose was to produce H. sapiens?

DAVID: We're here. God obviously wanted us. Why not stop since reasons have been presented?

All forms of life were/are here, so if he exists, your purposeful God obviously wanted them. If you are not interested in the purpose for which your purposeful God wanted us and them, why did you propose your theory in the first place?