Return to David's theory of evolution PART 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, July 02, 2022, 11:08 (657 days ago) @ David Turell

David’s theory of evolution

dhw: The history that we know is of countless life forms, econiches etc. And since the majority of these had no connection with sapiens and our food, it makes no sense to theorize that all of them were preparation for and an “absolute requirement” for sapiens and our food.

DAVID: All the 'countless life forms' form the history of evolution which led to us. Your objections simply throws all of that out as if it never happened. That is part of your weird thought process.

Your objections simply throw out all the life forms etc. which you say your God designed individually and which did NOT lead to us or our food, although you tell us that they were preparation for and an “absolute requirement” for us and our food. And this is part of your combination of theories which you yourself regard as senseless, since you cannot find any rational explanation and it “makes sense only to God”.

The Krebs cycle

DAVID: I've been long convinced that deep-sea vents were involved in the origin of life. The Kreb's cycle is at the heart of living biochemistry. That is runs backward and forward is a strong indication of a designer at work. How could that have happened by chance? I haven't read this book, but it obviously would help anyone to understand how to look at life through its biochemistry.

Back we go to the origin of life, and I agree that this is one of the strongest arguments for the existence of a designer. But the existence of a sourceless, immaterial, all-powerful mind which can create a whole universe and living material beings out of its own immateriality is just as great a mystery as the origin of life, and no amount of blather about “first cause” can solve it.

The Cambrian Gap

dhw: I have pointed out that “gaps” are caused by the fact that conditions remain the same for long periods of “stasis”, and the comparatively short period of time covered by the Cambrian would be sufficient for 30,000 or so generations of intelligent organisms to design new responses to the new conditions. The number is theoretical -I don’t mind how many generations you think would fill that period - but do you really believe that the generations themselves are theoretical? That there weren’t generations after generations of organisms during the 410,000 years?

DAVID: What you have obviously ignored yet again, is the obvious point: in all of evolutionary history there is no other gap like the Cambrian. All you do is theorize bloviated generations when how speciation happens is not known, and only you raise that issue desperately to save your Darwinian prejudices.

Of course nobody knows how speciation happens, and of course I accept that the Cambrian is a mystery, and so I look for possible answers to the relevant questions. For some reason, you prefer to dismiss my theories because they are only theories, whereas you can’t see that “all you do” is theorize about a super mind, unknown and unknowable, who preprogrammed it all 3.8 billion years ago, or kept popping in to perform countless operations or to produced brand new species that had no precursors, although history generally confirms the theory that all life forms except the first evolved from earlier life forms. You accept that there is a 50/50 chance that cells are intelligent, and offer no reason for rejecting my proposal that evolutionary changes take place between generations, regardless of the amount of time between bursts of innovation. So please explain why you think it is impossible for your God to have designed intelligent cells which, given the right conditions, might have produced the same changes within the same period of time that you say he took to produce them?

dhw: If only you would stop pretending that your combined theories are facts, and you would acknowledge that if they "make sense only to God", then they do not make sense to you, we could put a stop to the repetition and all your evasions.

DAVID: More psychoanalysis.

dhw: There is no psychoanalysis involved. Your theories are not facts, and since you say they “make sense only to God”, quite clearly they do not make sense to you!

DAVID: What God does always makes sense to Him and to me, because God always knows what He is doing.

I have no doubt that if God exists, he knows what he is doing and also why he is doing it. You have said that your version “makes sense only to God”, so how can it make sense to you, unless you and God are one and the same?

DAVID: You obviously do not know how to think about God as I do. This gap has driven our discussions for years.

I must confess I find it much more logical to think that God himself has comprehensibly logical reasons for everything that he does, as opposed to your version of his deeds and his reasons, which you yourself find totally incomprehensible, since it “makes sense only to God”.