Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Thursday, June 03, 2021, 12:07 (1267 days ago) @ David Turell

Fungi helped plants

(dhw's bolds)

29th May
DAVID: God designed epigenetic mechanism into organisms. The organisms then use them independently as minor adaptations are required by changes.

31st May
dhw: Please tell us which part of the adaptation process takes place INDEPENDENTLY of your God.

DAVID: Use of the existing epigenetic mechanism by the organism is independent of God

1st June
dhw: Thank you. “Use of the existing mechanism” entails processing the information from outside [etc.].The organisms do not “follow instructions” from God, so how can they possibly do all this without some form of autonomous intelligence?

DAVID: how do you know organisms do not follow genome instructions (I assume from God)

2nd June
dhw: Now you are trying to tell me that “use of the existing mechanism” could be dependent on God’s instructions. Please don’t backtrack!

DAVID: I don't backtrack. You know I believe the plants automatically followed instructions, and I know and do not accept your view.

So let’s start again: please tell us which part of the adaptation process takes place independently of your God.

Neutron stars
DAVID: Why is it so important to you that God allows organisms to make very complex adjustments instead of simply following instructions from God.

Because I am examining different theories concerning the history of life and evolution, and concerning the purpose, methods and nature of God, if he exists. I have examined your illogical theory of evolution (your God’s only purpose is humans plus food supply, and so he specially designs millions of life forms and food supplies, 99% of which have no connection with humans) and your non-theory of theodicy (God always has good intentions, and let’s hope future research will explain why he specially designed murderous viruses and bacteria), and find both of them unsatisfactory. I have come up with various theistic alternatives to your illogical theory and your non-theory, and one of them is that your God gave cells the intelligence to work out their own methods of survival. Your only objection to this is that it creates a different “humanized” image of God from the “humanized” image you yourself have of him. As for “importance”, I opened this website and you joined it because both of us are fascinated by all the subjects we deal with.

Clear evidence of common descent
dhw: De novo speciation means creating species that have no antecedent. How does that come to mean “continuity” and “common descent”?

DAVID: God designs evolutionary advances. God's control is a part of my view of the continuity.

Evolutionary continuity would be one species developing directly from another. De novo creation of species is the opposite of continuity.

David’s theory of evolution
DAVID: There is no question foresight is involved in this design. We know cells have a specific life span and must die around other living cells. Living cells and disposal of dying cells must be simultaneously part of the original design. Note dhw denies foresight is in evidence in evolutionary processes. That might support God exists.

Our discussions on evolution do not concern the existence of God, since my proposals allow for his existence as the designer of the original cells. My objections to the “foresight” argument do not relate to the original cells – clearly they must already have had the ability to reproduce and to change their own structures in the future, and I am not so arrogant as to assume there were not other aspects of what you call ”foresight” incorporated into the original design. What I object to is your blanket assumption that every single innovation and every single solution to every single problem of survival throughout the history of evolution was planned or dabbled in advance (thanks to your God’s “foresight”), even to the extent that whales only entered the water after your God had turned their legs into flippers, and bacteria were given instructions on how to fight every new threat to their existence. (Also see above, under “Fungi…”)

Immune complexity
DAVID: Having liquid and more solid phases to pinpoint usable areas in DNA is an extremely clever clever design, as cells in general do this in multiple ways making wall-less organelles in the body of the cell by liquid or solid phase transitions isolating manufacturing processes to very specific regions. To twist an old saying 'cleverless is equal to Godliness'.

The complexity of the cell is indeed mind-boggling, and the whole argument for design is a vital argument against atheism. I also have reasons for objecting to theism , which is why I remain agnostic,