Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Sunday, July 25, 2021, 14:07 (379 days ago) @ David Turell

Immunity system complexity

DAVID: I believe God designed each stage of evolution knowing how each stage could/would handle future problems by using His implanted instructions. Popping in is primarily at each new stage creation. "Dabble" is only at each new stage of evolution design.

Each stage of what? Since you believe in common descent, this means that he popped in to make every change in every organism that ever lived (and we shouldn’t forget that you think he also popped in to organize every lifestyle, strategy and natural wonder). So now, instead of a 3.8-billion-year-old programme for every solution to every problem, you have him separately planting every future solution ad hoc to every problem that every individual life form will experience – until, of course, it becomes extinct, so he must have deliberately omitted to enclose instructions for the particular problem that makes them become extinct. And all these individual operations were designed as part of the one and only goal to design H. sapiens plus our food, and apparently this theory is based on science.

DAVID: They are designed/coded to respond this way. They are coded to respond to new events.

dhw: Perhaps you could be a little more specific about the meaning of “coded” and “programmed”. As above, is this the 3.8-billion-year-old code/programme for every single new problem/solution/development in the history of life? Or God planting instructions whenever there’s a new problem? Cells are “designed to respond” could mean they have been given the intelligence with which to work out their responses. That’s fine with me, but it's totally the opposite of your theory that they have been given the individual solutions to every individual problem in advance.

DAVID: As above each new stage is designed for its future needs, based on an underlying very flexible genome code present in its initial design in bacteria.

A flexible genome code has to be present in all life forms if they are to evolve into something else. According to you, T cells respond to new events. I suggest that is the case with ALL cells and cell communities, and underlies the whole process of evolution. Every change is a RESPONSE to something new, as opposed to being pre-planned.

Theistic evolution vs Darwinism [...]
dhw: You stated that agnostics and atheists were leaving, and I have asked for clarification, since such a statement could imply that atheists and agnostics are now abandoning Darwin’s whole theory, and also that they are turning to God.

DAVID: The evidence is some are turning to ID. I view your personal research as incomplete without reading some ID info.

dhw: I have long ago accepted the argument for intelligent design, and you may recall that you yourself put the case in your two books, which I have read and admired. It is perfectly possible to accept the logic of the ID argument without rejecting common descent and without becoming a theist.

DAVID: Have you really accepted it?

Yes, I have really accepted it, just as I have really accepted the possible authenticity of any psychic experiences. If I hadn’t, I would be far more inclined to embrace atheism. Since I have constantly repeated my acceptance of the logic of ID, perhaps you will now do me the honour of assuming that I mean what I say!

DAVID: All of us accept common descent which is not an active issue.

Whenever you talk of “de novo” creation, you oppose the concept of common descent.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum