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

by dhw, Monday, January 24, 2022, 12:49 (1032 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I start with the belief God made history. From that Adler proves the most unusual animal result proves God. Try thinking like Adler. I do.

dhw: Of course if you believe in God, you believe he made history. And how many more times do you want me to repeat that I have no quarrel with design as evidence of God’s existence? The dispute – as if you didn’t know it – is over your belief that your God designed every single life form as part of his one and only goal to design humans plus our food, although most life forms had no connection with humans or our food. You admit that you don’t know why. This silly dodging game should end now.

DAVID: If Adler followed your odd view of evolution, he would not have written his book.
And
DAVID (under “universal consciousness”): You always miss Adler's point that the production of most unusual humans proves God. That fits my view of evolution designed toward a goal of humans, doesn't it?

I have not offered an odd view of evolution here. I have questioned your odd view, which according to you, your beloved Adler never covered, since his aim was to prove the existence of God, not God’s method of fulfilling his one and only purpose by not fulfilling his one and only purpose until he’d produced countless life forms that had no connection with his one and only purpose. Please stop trying to hide behind Adler.

SURVIVAL
dhw: Do you [or do you not] believe that the innovations which lead to speciation were designed to serve the purpose of improving organisms’ chances of survival?

DAVID: Still arguing are you? Of course adaptations by species help their survival. The gaps in the fossil record does not help the argument that stepwise adaptations lead to new species.

I deliberately left out the word “adaptations” last time, but that hasn’t stopped you from yet again dodging the question. It’s bolded, and concerns “innovations”. Please answer.

The missing fossils argument
DAVID: You are forgetting our discussion that Darwinists and IDers both use the same maths to calculate mutation rates and times. None of them would agree with your off hand dismissal of 410,000 years. Compared to 3.8 billions of years 410,000 is 0.0011 % of the time for more complexity to appear than ever seen before. Why didn't your bright cells do it before then.???

dhw: I’m not disputing the maths. I’m disputing the claim that 410,000 years is not long enough for intelligent cells to produce new species in response to new conditions. Your question raises the obvious question why, if your all-powerful God’s "one and only goal" was to design humans and their food, he didn’t “do it before then[/b]??? ]

Not answered.

DAVID: All of Cambrians by your brilliant cells' designs. Fairy tale. As for God's method, His created history easily reveals the story of His methods.

dhw: If I put on my theist’s hat, it’s all of Cambrians by God’s brilliant design of brilliant cells. The history is a vast, ever changing bush of life forms (including Cambrians) - most of which had no connection with humans – that have come and gone. Humans are the last known species – the brilliant culmination perhaps of God’s brilliant invention rather than a fairytale, 3.8 billion-year-old computer programme or endless individual operations to create new species irrelevant to his one and only purpose.

DAVID: Your theist hat is interesting. God's cells are as brilliant as He is. Hopefully they know what God's wishes are.

No they aren’t as brilliant as he is, if he exists, and I would not expect them even to dream of your God's existence. Let us assume that he is all-powerful and all-knowing. Have you noticed that all life forms try to survive, and yet all individuals die, and species also die, and there are terrible diseases that we and other species fail to cure? Intelligent though they may be, cells can never figure out how to be eternal and immortal, like your God. So I would suggest that since he is all-powerful and all-knowing, he actually wanted them to be the way they are. Intelligent enough to design different ways of surviving for a limited time (hence the astonishing variety of life forms, natural wonders etc.), but nowhere near as brilliant as he is. Even our own brilliant cells can't figure out the major mysteries of life. Only he can - if he exists.

dhw: Meanwhile, thank you for the next eye-opening article on genetic complexity:

QUOTE: Mirouze says TEs are likely major drivers of rapid evolution—changes measured in terms of generations rather than millennia. […][dhw's bold]

dhw: […] Thank you as always for your integrity in reproducing articles that support my proposals.

DAVID: The author's appraisal of gaps mimics yours. Both have great imaginations.

dhw: Yes, it’s good to have support from scientists who work in the field. I don’t know why you regard this as more “imaginative” than an unknown, all-powerful, sourceless beingbwho took billions of years to create every life form and natural wonder you can think of, although he only wanted to programme/dabble one particular life form and its food.

DAVID: Still fighting Adler's point.

Adler doesn’t cover your illogical theory. See earlier in this post.