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

by David Turell , Saturday, June 18, 2022, 15:50 (675 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You constantly ignore that evolution blossoms into the huge bush of life, which then has multiple ecosystems to provide food for all.

dhw:That is precisely what YOU ignore. If your God only wanted to create humans plus our food, why did he individually design countless extinct life forms and ecosystems that had no connection with us? Would we have starved if he hadn’t designed the brontosaurus?

The bold is your distorted version of my view of God's choices of purpose. Both Adler and I view humans as proof of God. So you fully disagree with one of the premier philosphers of the 20th century. I find you analyis totally illogical and always asked you if you want God to do direct creation for which history offers no evidence. Your tiny human logic is no match for God's choices.

dhw: […] I would suggest that they did indeed start by knowing how to handle themselves and, crucially, not only how to reproduce but also how to adapt and diversify, and ultimately – through cooperation and communication – to build increasingly complex organs and organisms in the process we call evolution. The mechanism I propose is - surprise, surprise - a form of intelligence which enabled them to do all these things. And - surprise, surprise - I regard it as possible that this mechanism was designed by an unknown intelligence we call God.

DAVID: How else could intelligence have appeared besides your usual scurry back to a possible God?

I gave you a full reply to this yesterday:

dhw: […] I find the argument for design (in this case, that of the intelligent cell) perfectly logical, and am therefore open to the possibility of there being a designer. However, while I find it difficult to believe that chance (the other option, given an eternity and infinity of possible combinations) could create such complexity, I find it equally difficult to believe that there is an eternal, immaterial mind that had no source, and has simply been “there” forever, somehow creating vast quantities of matter out of its own immateriality, and exercising its powers of psychokinesis to manipulate the materials into galaxies and solar systems, bacteria and dinosaurs, humans and the duckbilled platypus.

DAVID: How likely is chance vs an active mind? The picket fence as usual.

dhw: Since both options seem equally irrational, it requires faith to believe in either.

The necessity for a designing mind is a very rational thought

Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: 410,000 years

dhw: You wrote: “We do not know how species appear or the theoretical times involved”, and you have totally ignored the argument that it is generations, not time that produce new species […]

DAVID: […]. Every species gap we have in fossils is millions of years except the Cambrian!!! Use the whale series as one example. There are many others. No examples of tiny genertional changes in fossils is ever found. All new species appear de novo. (Gould)

dhw: I’m not denying that the Cambrian explosion happened! No matter what theory you embrace, quite clearly there was a new and major development that accelerated speciation (maybe an increase in oxygen). And so in contrast to the long periods of stasis, with no innovations, the sudden change in conditions created a sudden burst of innovations. (This is what Gould called “punctuated equilibrium": periods of stasis punctuated by bursts of innovation.) And still you ignore the argument that it is generations, not time, that produce new species.

DAVID: Neat theory with NO fossil support.

dhw: You continue to ignore all the arguments that explain why a complete fossil record is highly unlikely, and you have not explained why you think it is time and not generations that produce species.

Those arguments are no more than logical wishful guesses. I've given you an opinion from an archeologist you refuse to accept, that indicates after 170 years of studying the Camrbian Gap nothing important will be found to remove the gap. The new 410,000 year gap, when compared to other gaps, simply reinforces to magnitude of the phenotypical changes in an extremely short period. And finally your wishful generations theory has no evidence. All newspecies we know about appear afer gaps (punc-eq)