Return to David's theory of evolution PART 1 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Sunday, June 12, 2022, 16:53 (681 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: It is not history 1) that humans (plus food supply) were God’s one and only goal from the start of life, and 2) that God individually designed every life form (and food supply), and did so as “an absolute requirement” for his design of human (plus food supply).

Of course it is not history!! It is an interpretation of God's created evolution history.

Standard model
DAVID: All that hapens is dhw wants answers that do not exist for his own analysis that confuses him about why God did it the way He did it. The best way to think about it is early on there were bacteria at the start of life. There followed a whole continuous series of increasingly complex steps until humans arrived. That is what happened. We can analyze it for clues of purpose. But the method happened and cannot be questioned in and of itsslf since it represents pure historical fact.

dhw: For those of us who believe in the theory of evolution, it is indeed historical fact that ALL life forms – including those that are now extinct and did not lead to humans - descended in a continuous process from bacteria. Once more: It is not historical fact that your God designed every species individually, and it is not historical fact that every single one of them was an “absolute requirement” for the appearance of humans. The fact that we are the latest species does not mean that we were your God’s purpose right from the start of life, and the fact that you cannot supply an answer to my question why your God would use such a method to achieve such a goal would, I suggest, indicate confusion on your part rather than mine.

What you refuse to accept is I fully believe God does it any way He wishes and I don't need to queston it or satisfy your confusion about how God did it (His reasoning) as I view God.

Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: 410,000 years

DAVID: Of course research continues. You are carefully throwing up lots of speciation theories to avoid the point that the complex animals of Cambrian appearing in a short time demands a designing mind produced them.

dhw: I have asked if - as you have claimed - the 410,000 figure is now accepted by everybody (no answer from you), and I have pointed out that it is irrelevant to the problem of the gaps in the fossil record.

DAVID: And I have answered: a peer-reviewed article in a major journal means it is accepted!!!

dhw: I didn’t know that one peer-reviewed article in one major journal indicated the establishment of a universally accepted truth, but it really doesn’t matter.

Yes it does. What do you think peer-review entails? A review by several established recognized experts in the specific field.

dhw: The gap between Ediacaran and Cambrian is irrelevant to our discussion of the “gaps” in the fossil record.

It is very relevant. Such a huge change in animal forms in such a short period doesn't fit the usual timing of a speciation change as in the whale series.

DAVID: Your plea above does not explain the gaps Gould recognized were a problem for Darwin theory. Species appear with gaps in form of the fossil series.

dhw: I asked you a direct question, based on your own statement: “form changes take time” etc. How many thousands of years do you regard as being “sudden”? As regards the gaps, Darwin himself recognized that they were a problem, and I have just devoted several posts to offering different reasons for the gaps in the fossil record.

The true answer to how long speciation takes is unknown. The many gaps don't tell us. The gaps as missing fossils is a theory not supported by the Camrian research now that soft tissue fossils are turning up and Cambrian fossilsae being found all over the world as the gap remains.