Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, January 18, 2022, 08:47 (131 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: We are back to a supposition with no proof after 160 years, disputed by a large group of trained scientists that carries some force of important consideration.

dhw: I must confess I'm surprised that there are lots of scientists who believe that the adaptations and innovations which result in speciation do NOT improve organisms’ chances of survival.

DAVID: The only point under discussion is does striving for survival cause speciation? Don't twist the point out of shape.

That is precisely what I mean when I say that the motive for the adaptations and innovations that lead to speciation is the quest to improve chances of survival. I’m surprised that large groups of scientists disagree. Do they argue that the adaptations and innovations do NOT improve chances of survival? If that is the case, what do they say is the purpose of, say, flippers replacing legs?

Pathogens fight hosts
dhw: I do not agree that every ecosystem and every branch of life forms and foods that ever existed was specially designed by God as “part of the goal of evolving [=designing] humans” and their food. THAT is the illogical basis of your theory of evolution, which you constantly try to edit out of your posts.

DAVID: There you go again slicing away the past evolution from the present forms, as if never connected.

dhw: You have agreed that only ONE of the vast number of branches led to humans. As for food, you have agreed that “the current bush of food is NOW for humans NOW. There were smaller bushes in the PAST for PAST forms”, and “Extinct life has no role in current time”. So how could ALL branches and food bushes have been “part of the goal of evolving humans” plus food? Please stop backtracking.

DAVID: No backtrack, since i had to follow yours above. Evolution is one continuous process or it isn't. Your choice is not mine as you slice it up into unrelated parts.

Evolution is not one continuous process from bacteria to humans plus their econiches! It branches out into countless unrelated branches and econiches. That is why it is absurd to argue that the goal of every past branch and every past econiche was to produce humans and their econiches.

DAVID: The bush of life has distinct stages of complexification in each branch. Most branches supply food for all.

But each branch does not lead to humans! Each branch supplies food for itself until it stops doing so and the branch dies. And yet you say that each branch over 3+ billion years was “part of the goal of evolving [= designing] humans” and their food!

DAVID… We see what He wanted from the beginning of His creations, and think He always was certain of His endpoints.

dhw: Why plural “endpoints” when you insist that he only had one?

DAVID: More than one: all the branches of the bush are food for all, without which no life could exist.

Food for all what? You keep using the word endpoint instead of goal and purpose. If all you mean is that every extinct life form was an endpoint because it ended, then there is nothing to discuss. I complain about your theory that every extinct life form was part of your God’s goal to produce humans and their food. (I'm hoping these repetitions will help you to remember what it is I complain about!;-))

dhw: I shan’t bother to comment on your silly “humanization” argument, since you have agreed unequivocally that your God may have thought patterns etc. similar to ours.

See “A possible God’s possible nature and purpose”.

DAVID: My theory is illogical only to you, so I view it as your problem.

dhw: If you can’t explain it, how can you claim that it is logical?

DAVID: Explain what I haven't already explained?

A couple of days ago you wrote: “I have never tried to explain why God evolves all His creations. It is his choice for His reasons, unknown to us.” Can you or can’t you explain why God evolves [= specially designs] ALL his creations, even though the ONLY creations he wants to evolve are us and our food?

DAVID: My cohort of IDer are with me. I have an army of folks.

Then do please tell me why they think your God evolved (= individually designed) ALL the life forms etc which had no connection with humans and their food, although his only purpose was to evolve humans and their food.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum