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

by dhw, Tuesday, May 03, 2022, 09:18 (723 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Perfectly fits my view from ID. I stand by my interpretations as quoted, not as dhw attempts strangely to twist the interpretations.

dhw: What twist? First you say that all past species and econiches were designed as preparation for us humans and our econiches, and then you agree that they were only designed for the past,not the present, and had no role to play in the present.

DAVID: In the past not for the past!!!!

You wrote: “The current bush of food is NOW for humans NOW. There were smaller bushes in the PAST for PAST forms.” Will you ever stop contradicting yourself?

DAVID: In goal-oriented processes adjustments in design are minor modifications, not experimentation.

dhw: Moving in “totally new directions” is not minor modification! Are you now withdrawing your comment about the dinosaur extinction?

DAVID: We do not know if Chixculub was directed or accidental.

If it was directed, then your God moved off in a “totally new direction”. If it was an accident, then your God was not in control. Why would he specially design the dinosaurs and then, through sheer chance, move off in a “totally new direction”? Either way, your God changed or was forced to change direction in pursuit of what you believe to have been his one and only goal.

Gaps by design

DAVID: My theory makes perfect sense to me, but not to you. God, in total control, can form an evolutionary process of His own design, not related to Darwinism which constantly infects your illogical thought. This type of 'common descent' is not Darwin's type. It has huge gaps when the precursor biochemical processes are ready for a gap. The gaps are jumps in body form (phenotypes). The gaps in the fossil record were well-recognized years ago by Gould!!!

I am not disputing that there are gaps in the fossil record! Stop dodging! Your explanation of the gaps is that your God directly designed new species which had no precursors and from which, in the case of the Cambrian, we humans are descended. This can only mean that according to you there is no direct line from bacteria to humans! And if God was perfectly capable of directly designing new species with no precursors, and if his one and only aim was to design us and our food, why would he not have designed us directly? Your answer, I repeat: “What I cannot explain is why God chose evolution over direct creation. Why can’t you accept that explanation?” Coupled with: “God makes sense only to Himself”, which denotes that your theory does not make sense to you.

dhw: If a theory does not make sense to you, then perhaps you should consider alternatives that do make sense to you. In our discussion above, you agree that your God makes adjustments as he goes along, even to the extent of going in “totally new directions”. This could hardly be a clearer endorsement of the theory that he was experimenting, or that he kept getting new ideas as he went along.

DAVID: Back to your treasured human form of God who is wandering along. Any God wo can create our universe, knows exactly what He is doing.

You have not explained his adjustments and his total change of direction. On the other hand, if he knows what he is doing, the higgledy-piggledy bush of life forms and econiches unrelated to humans can be explained by his deliberately creating a free-for-all, along with the option to dabble if he felt like it. You have agreed that all my theories provide logical theistic explanations for the history of life as we know it. The only theory you cannot make sense of is your own.