Natures wonders: insect migration (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, December 12, 2021, 15:46 (1075 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: It doesn't matter to me how God did his programming. My conclusion that God designed evolution suffices.

dhw: But it doesn’t “suffice” for you! I also conclude that if God exists, he designed evolution! Our discussions concern his possible purposes and methods, because your conclusion is that he personally designed every single life form, econiche, lifestyle, natural wonder etc., and that he did so for the sole purpose of designing H. sapiens and his food, although most of them had no connection with humans or their food. We needn’t go over my objections to your logic, or over my various alternative theistic explanations of life’s history. It is clear that, although you admit that have no idea why your God would have chosen your version of his method of achieving your version of his purpose, you will never budge. The problem is that it permeates so many of your posts that we are locked into this endless repetition!

I arrived at a fixed position, as you describe it. from reading lots of opinions by very bright folks. Especially Adler and you understand his opinion, I hope, that the appearance of humans offers the BEST proof of God available. Surprise, my 'fixed position' became belief. Why should I change just because you haven't? We differ in how God designed evolution, and your main concern is that God gave organisms more latitude in their own futuristic designs. I have pointed out the big holes in that theory: huge fossil gaps, and all we know about existing species is they can modify to changing conditions, but are still the same species. So our debate is the cause of new species. You agree God ran evolution. Your thought that cells are intelligent, not just appearing so, come from those scientists who scrupulously avoid any sense of God, although they might be believers, in their opinions which are not FACT. I follow just as highly trained folks as your experts, but they believe in God and see evolution as I do. Actually I arrived at my position much before fully embracing ID. We will always differ.

dhw: Meanwhile, what do you think was the purpose of your God giving all these cell communities the ability to interpret if they didn’t need to interpret anything?

DAVID: My concept of cell intelligence is totally opposite yours. It is entirely automatic as constantly stated.

Same again. You make concessions, as below, but then withdraw them with a repetition of your fixed belief.

DAVID: They are given the ability to interpret, just the opposite from your thought.

dhw: The ability to interpret is exactly my thought, since it entails the autonomous, intelligent use of all the abilities listed above, as opposed to bees and ants automatically obeying instructions.

DAVID: And I'll stick with automaticity.
And under "Spider webs”:

DAVID: Spider webs are at the same level of complexity as weaverbird nests and require the same designer help.

dhw: You agree that these life forms have the ability to interpret. The attributes involved in bee and ant interpretation include sentience, cognition, information-processing, purpose, and decision-making. I asked how these differ – apart from time and scale – from our own. Your answer is that you’ll stick with automaticity. Do you agree with the above list of attributes involved in interpretation? And do you still accept that bees and ants have the ability to interpret?

Because they are guided in how to do so by the algorithms you abhor. Like single cells, you are watching primarily unthinking guided behavior from the outside and making a rigid wishful conclusion, not borne out by the scientific evidence being presented. You have admitted seeing the cell automaticity in specific processes and imagine thought behind it! The thought you wish is in the design.