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

by dhw, Wednesday, May 11, 2022, 09:22 (925 days ago) @ David Turell

Chixculub

DAVID: The bush has many goals along the way to finally humans.

dhw: […] Please tell us what other goals he had apart from designing humans and our food.

DAVID: There are many intermediate goals.

dhw: Such as?

DAVID: All the branches of the bush to create all the necessary ecosystems.

Necessary for what? You give us your answer under “Role of fungi in ecosystems”:

DAVID: I think by now I 've established the overall importance of ecosystems created by the enormous diverse bush of life. Since living creatures must eat, and the human population has grown so big, the bush must be that enormous. That explains away dhw's compliant that God did not know what He was doing and creating all the bush instead of creating humans straightaway. Accepting humans as God's primary goal, it all makes perfect sense, with God preparing for the huge human population He knew would appear.(dhw’s bold)

Yes, all living creatures must eat, and all the creatures of the past also had to eat. Yes, we need an enormous bush now, but as you so rightly observed, though you may wish you hadn’t: “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”. This makes perfect sense, but makes nonsense of your claim that past bushes were preparation for the huge human population. “Knew would appear” is a strangely passive expression to use when you keep telling us that he actively designed each stage of human development and you have no idea why he didn’t design us directly. Meanwhile, you still haven’t identified any intermediate goals. And finally, my complaint is not that “God did not know what he was doing”. My complaint is that your theory is riddled with contradictions.

Schroeder

DAVID: He explains it in his terms to me. My theories are from a distillation of Schroeder.

dhw: If Schroeder was able to explain why your God, whose one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens plus food, designed countless life forms that did not lead to H. sapiens plus food, and why your God chose to design H. sapiens in stages rather than directly, I’m sure you would remember his explanation. Or did he agree with you that it couldn’t be explained and it only made sense to God?

DAVID: […] Reading a 'blurb' about his books doesn't tell you anything evidentiary. Schroeder helped make me be what I believe.

dhw: And so did Adler, except that Adler didn’t touch on your illogical theory of evolution, which is the matter in dispute on this thread and which you constantly gloss over with your generalizations. I can only repeat that if Schroeder supports your theory of evolution and can’t explain it, then his thinking is as illogical as yours. As for the blurb, I’m surprised that the concept of a learning God should be included if in actual fact he views God as you do, namely an all-powerful being who knows exactly what he’s doing and has planned all the details in advance.

DAVID: I'm sorry that I don't have time to go back and refresh my memory. What you have from me is a distillation of all I have read and my logical conclusions. In all of our discussions about God's possible personality, we are in wide disagreement. We do not think about God in the same way which keeps us far apart.

Once again you hide behind vague generalisations. The subject is your illogical, self-contradictory theories of evolution. I don’t understand why you find it necessary to keep dodging like this. You have agreed that you can’t explain your own reasoning, have said quite explicitly that your theory only makes sense to God, so that should end the discussion. (It won’t, because you continue to push your theory in other posts – e.g. today on fungi.)

Cell splitting DNA controls

QUOTE: "Expecting random mutations to somehow emerge then be “selected” by some blind, aimless, uncaring “agentless act” (as Neil Thomas has put it) to construct this complex system seems beyond rational consideration.

DAVID: Simple cell splitting in the previous entry. This shows how big the evolutionary gap is in the Cambrian explosion. Stem cells at work from sexual reproduction!!!! It is not just the new animals' forms that comprise the gap. Darwin had no idea. A nice taste if ID thinking. Note the bold.

From the very beginning of our discussions, we have agreed that random mutations cannot explain the vast complexities of life. This is called flogging a dead horse. I’m intrigued by your emphasis on the vital role of stem cells in evolution, as this was the subject of a previous discussion in which you played down their importance. But as before, I don’t know enough about the subject to pursue it any further.