Miscellany (General)

by David Turell @, Wednesday, January 13, 2021, 18:34 (13 days ago) @ dhw

Far out cosmology

DAVID: Amazing new methods, with findings both Dawkins and I can agree upon!!!

dhw: I should imagine you would even agree that there is life and reproduction on Earth, and evolution happened, and we humans are here, and we are conscious, and we need food. That does not make your respective faiths in a God (you) or in the power of science eventually to prove that there is no God (Dawkins) any less unscientific.

Same point from me: scientific findings are the only facts we can use to theorize.


DAVID: Cell committee adaptations do not explain the gaps of phenotype and physiology in evolutionary speciation.

dhw: I have acknowledged that twice now (bolded). Nobody has a proven theory to explain the innovations that lead to speciation. But the fact that cells restructure themselves in order to adapt at least tells us that they have the ability to restructure themselves. Now please answer my question: what evidence do you have that cell communities change IN ANTICIPATION of changing conditions?

DAVID: First the large gaps (Gould) ( gaps of phenotype and physiology) in evolutionary speciation. in the fossil record show us so far no bit by bit adaptations to reach speciation. The only logical solution is design in advance. The ID position is mine. The new complexities require an explanation, and it is design by a designing mind.

dhw: How can you call that evidence? You are merely repeating your belief and telling us that it is the only possibility! Of course innovation requires an explanation, but at least we KNOW that life forms change IN RESPONSE to new conditions. You are right to say that we do not have a continuous line of fossils from millions and millions of years ago tracing every single innovation from bacteria to humans. Nor would it be reasonable to expect such miracles of preservation. How does that prove that your God designed every innovation in advance of changing conditions? And design is not what I am querying.

I stick to the point a designing mind is necessary

DAVID: And secondly, new artifacts only found with new larger brains.

dhw: That is a different subject dealt with ad nauseam under “brain expansion”.

It still is evidence.

Glass sponge lattice design

DAVID: A designing mind is what must have made this structural plan, better than any thought of by human engineers.

dhw: I love these natural wonders and am always grateful to you for such articles. Among other things, they ought to make us humans feel humble when we see the sheer ingenuity of the different life forms, with their endlessly inventive ways of ensuring survival. I can fully understand your argument for design, and we don’t need to go into details as to the hows, whos, whats and whys.

Only a mind can make these designs.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum