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

by dhw, Sunday, February 27, 2022, 08:35 (998 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: 'One and only purpose' is your overemphasized version of my views. Adler relies on humans as an endpoint. Nothing wrong with it. All the other organisms are steps in evolution and food supply for all.

dhw: All the other organisms that were not connected with humans were obviously steps in evolution if you believe in evolution, and obviously all organisms require and provide food. If, for the second time, you now definitively agree that NOT all past life forms, foods, econiches, lifestyles, solutions, natural wonders etc. were “in preparation for humans” and were “part of the goal of evolving humans” or, in other words, were your God’s one and only purpose, then we can end this discussion.

DAVID: Of course we arrived from a specific line of a single branch, but all the branches that surround us provide the food. I am using the giant bush process of evolution as a whole.

No you are not .You have told us that all the giant bushes that preceded ours were meant as “preparation” for us and our bush and were part of “the goal” of evolving humans and our food. If you now wish to change that theory, then please stop “beating about the bush” and say so.

DAVID: Name your god's goals

dhw: I have named them umpteen times! ...
1) To enjoy creation and to provide interesting things to watch.
2) To set in motion an unpredictable process which he does not control and which will be more interesting to watch than one he controls (free-for-all).
3) Your constantly repeated one and only goal, which you have now twice renounced: experimenting in order to create a being that might resemble himself and form a relationship with him. (You have inadvertently accepted experimentation under “biggest bacterium”.)
4) In the course of 1), constantly coming up with new ideas, and eventually hitting on 3) which becomes a new goal, as opposed to being the one and only goal from the beginning.

DAVID: Counter: 1)& 2) God does not need interesting things to watch. Humans need that.
3) God does not need experimentation to reach His endpoint purposes. (I did allow the minor point that the biggest bacterium was a possible side attempt to try)
4) God has all the desires to create He needs from the beginning. He doesn't come up with new ideas. Only humans do that.
Conclusion: You have made God totally human, as usual.

Conclusion: Although you agree that your God probably endowed us with thought patterns, emotions and logic similar to his (a perfectly understandable thing to do, since a creator would hardly create thought patterns and emotions he knew nothing about), you have closed your mind to any alternative theistic theory that might explain the history of life as we know it. You are convinced that you know how your God’s mind works, although you have no idea why he would adopt the method you impose on him in order to fulfil the purpose you impose on him.

dhw: What in your eyes is the solution/purpose of all the extinct life forms etc. that had no connection with us, and who has the authority to recognize it?

DAVID: Adler.

dhw: You have left out the purpose. According to you, Adler is concerned with proving your God’s existence and does NOT cover your illogical theory of evolution. Besides, when did Adler acquire the authority to tell the rest of us what we must “recognize”?

DAVID: Adler specifically uses God's evolution of humans to prove God exists.

dhw: As bolded above, and I’m not surprised that he doesn’t cover your illogical theory, since you regard him as a logical thinker.

DAVID: Please do remember, Adler accepted evolution as God's method to reach humans. He never discussed how God did it, as beside the point. I am the one who separately is trying to explain the nitty-gritty of how God did it. Explained in the past.

Explained in the past by telling me to ask God why he used the illogical method you have imposed on him in order to fulfil the one and only purpose you have imposed on him.

DAVID: The history of evolution is the same for all of us, except for you who splits it into unrelated segments.

dhw: Evolution is split into unrelated branches, and the vast majority of these had no connection with humans. Hence the absurdity of claiming that they were all “in preparation for humans “ and were all “part of the goal of evolving humans”, unless of course you now opt for theory (3) above.

DAVID: I have accepted paragraph two above as stated, and continue to view all of evolution as one whole giant process.

You have rejected all four of my alternatives. I agree with you that evolution is one whole giant process in which vast numbers of life forms and their foods have come and gone, and we represent only one branch among countless other branches of life forms and their foods, the vast majority of which had no connection with us and our foods. It is therefore manifestly illogical to claim that all other life forms and foods were “preparation” for us, and were “part of the goal of evolving humans” and our foods.