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

by dhw, Monday, January 31, 2022, 13:24 (1025 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: How long will it take you to realize Adler's thoughts and mine are one and the same. Your bold is totally irrational. That God chose to evolve us is a simple obvious concept.

dhw: The bold which you left out as usual was:BBB”…his one and only goal was to design humans plus food. You also say he individually designed countless species that had no connection with humans.” You are right. The theory that an all-powerful God would reach his one and only goal by designing countless species that had no connection with his one and only goal is totally irrational, which is why you say you can’t explain it and I should go and ask God.

DAVID: Your bold is totally irrational if you simply accept that God chose to evolve us from bacteria. We are His endpoint.

I don’t believe you are so blinkered that you cannot see the illogicality of a theory that has an all-powerful God with a single purpose (us) deliberately designing countless life forms that have no connection with us! If I told you that the one and only thing I wanted to make was a rowing boat, and so first I proceeded to make a kitchen cupboard, a bookshelf and a rabbit hutch, you’d send me off to have my brain tested.

Hibernation

DAVID: I read those works and come back to the same point. From the outside we see cells acting intelligently. Now interpretation rakes over. Intelligent or intelligent design. My choice as you know is the latter.

dhw: Yes, it is a matter of interpretation, but not “intelligent or intelligent design”! Both theories entail intelligent design. You have tried to dismiss intelligent design by intelligent cells on the grounds that no modern scientists agree that cells can be intelligent. Firstly, this is not true, and secondly you agree that it’s a 50/50 matter of interpretation, which is hardly grounds for rejecting the theory.

DAVID: Each of us has the right to a choice based on logical evidence.

Of course. But (a) it is NOT a choice between “intelligent [cells] or intelligent design” – both theories entail intelligent design, and (b) you clearly do not accept your own odds of 50/50!

Life’s required metals

DAVID: Without the bush, not enough food for all. My God knows what He is required to create.

dhw: […] it makes no sense to claim that species and their food supplies which had no connection with humans were specially designed for the sole purpose of specially designing humans and their food supplies.

DAVID: All part of an evolutionary process with early steps leading to later steps in a continuum.

Yes, life has continued to evolve into all its separate branches, extant and extinct, most of which had no connection with sapiens. As usual, you resort to generalizations in order to avoid the total illogicality of your theory bolded above.