Return to David's theory of evolution PART ONE (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, January 07, 2022, 07:48 (216 days ago) @ David Turell


DAVID: same old. All ecosystems are complex and required by all living organisms for food energy. This clearly explains the huge branched bush of life that evolution created, a point dhw disputes when he laughs at the theory that God wanted to create humans and their food. We are here. Of course He did.

dhw: There is absolutely no connection between your two points. All life forms need food. That does not mean all life forms and foods, including all those that had no connection with humans plus food, were “part of the goal of evolving humans” plus food. I do not laugh at your theory. The more you dodge this blatant illogicality, the more I squirm on your behalf. I wish you wouldn’t keep doing it.

DAVID: God provided the huge bush as a food supply all along while designing more advanced forms in stages we call new species. A whole connected process of stages as below:

Yes, if he exists, he provided food for all the extinct species that had no connection with humans. So how does that come to mean that all foods and all stages of all species were “part of the goal of evolving [= designing] humans” and their food? You constantly dodge the point at issue. please stop it.
The discussion now moves to your theory that your God designs all new species in advance of the conditions that they are required to cope with or exploit. And once again, you turn the discussion to the human brain. There is no point in my repeating my whole theory, as summarized yesterday.

dhw: You have never found any logical flaw in this theory, which is supported by the fact that we KNOW the brain changes IN RESPONSE to new dequirements, and no one has ever recorded a brain changing IN ADVANCE of the requirement that the brain has to meet.

DAVID: Same old dodge. Your bold is totally illogical in face of sapiens' brain history. So big and so complex with little to do.

You seem to think that sapiens’ brain is the only complex one! It’s all a matter of degree, and it is manifestly absurd to say that there was “little to do”! The history of all the homos is full of new inventions and increasingly complex modes of living. Sapiens was not the first hunter-gatherer, maker of tools and weapons and clothes, user of fire etc. Do you think surviving indigenous people in the rainforest have “little to do” and have no brain complexity? Our brain would have reached its current size through some new requirement, and subsequent new requirements have resulted in further complexification – with such efficiency that it has shrunk. Do you really believe that the illiterate women's brains complexified BEFORE they learned to read?

DAVID: A cerebral cortex arrangement highly complex with five layers of neurons, not like the chimp's simple arrangement. We came from apes and God designed the many differences. The proof you want comes from logical analysis of known facts.

Yes, it’s complex compared to the chimp. Yes, we came from apes. How does that prove that our brains change IN ANTICIPATION of new requirements and not in RESPONSE to them???

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum