David's theory of evolution: God's error corrections II (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, October 22, 2020, 11:45 (42 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Your same chopped up view of evolution, which really is a continuum, each step following the last. In that sense, over much time humans are directly related to bacteria.

dhw: "In that sense", EVERY species is related to bacteria over time, but NOT directly! Firstly, you keep omitting your belief that your God directly designed every species, and extinct life plays no part in current time. And secondly, for your anthropocentric theory to be true, the brontosaurus would have to be “directly related” to humans. By your own explicit admission, it isn’t! You wrote: "Of course the brontosaurus is not directly connected to us". So yet again, why did your God directly design it if his only goal was to directly design H. sapiens?

DAVID: All stages on all branches follow from previous stages. We are not in the brontosaurus branch which is the point of my quoted comment. But we are all related to bacteria as commonality in DNA's show. It can't be chopped up.

You are gradually beginning to get the message but still desperately trying to avoid the conclusion. Yes, all life forms (and their food supplies) are/were related to BACTERIA. All life forms (and their food supplies) were NOT related to humans. 99% of life forms (and their food supplies) had no connection with humans and “extinct life plays no role in current time”! Therefore, how can you argue that your God directly designed all life forms (and their food supplies) as “part of the goal of evolving [= directly designing] humans [and their food supplies]”?

The rest of your post circles round the same attempt to avoid this question, apart from your last comment on faith:

DAVID: There is no proof of God running evolution. It is my faith.

Your faith is not confined to God running evolution. It entails a rigid belief that 1) your God directly designed every extinct and extant life form, econiche, natural wonder etc., and 2) that every one of them was part of his goal of evolving (= directly designing) H. sapiens and his food supply, even though you acknowledge that 99% of them had no direct connection with humans. That is the part of your faith that makes no sense.
x
Under "Ironclad Beetle":

QUOTE: "This insect’s rugged exoskeleton is so tough that the beetle can survive getting run over by cars, and many would-be predators don’t stand a chance of cracking one open. […]

DAVID:[...] The question for me is what need caused this design. Darwin theory would want to know what caused this adaptation? My answer is the designer designs what He wants, as many designs in evolution show, appearing without need, as in the unwarranted/unreasonable appearance of humans.

I would have thought it was obvious that what caused the adaptation was the need for the beetle to protect itself against predators! The need to survive is the obvious cause for all adaptations! There are approx. 380,000 “species” of beetle, and apparently they’ve been around for millions and millions of years “without need”. If God directly designed the ironclad one, as opposed to it having designed its own means of survival, then presumably he would have designed the other 379,999 species as well, also “without need”, so please tell us in what way they and the ironclad beetle were/are “part of the goal of evolving humans”. Your comment above seems to suggest that he designed them because he wanted to design them. Maybe he just likes designing things! And is interested in them. Or maybe he gave cells the ability to do their own designing, and watched to see what they would come up with. Even more interesting. (See “Theodicy”)


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum