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

by David Turell , Wednesday, July 06, 2022, 16:51 (659 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Your invented generational theory for speciation does not explain wholly new life forms with no precursors in such a short period. Time is of the essence in this discussion.

dhw: Your God’s existence, his 3.8-billion-year-old book of instructions for the whole of evolution, his ad hoc dabbling, and theories 1), 2) and 3) are all “invented” theories. Since you believe in common descent, please explain why you do not think evolutionary changes in general could have occurred through the responses of each generation to new conditions. The Cambrian is an anomaly, because there are no fossils and because of the comparatively short time during which major changes took place, resulting in new species.

The bold is absolutely wrong!!! The study used fossils from both periods to establish a new time for the gaps length!

dhw: […] whatever may have been the change was sufficiently drastic to allow for major innovations [...]

DAVID: The bold is sheer sophistry. Changed conditions allow for change but are never the actual driving cause, are they?

dhw: When I say the change must have been sufficiently drastic “to allow for major innovations”, I mean “to allow for innovations”. Why is that sophistry?

Why did you accuse me of sophistry?

Simple: 'changed conditions' do not explain the magnitude of difference in the new forms.

dhw: My God is not “entirely humanized”, and he does not “bumble along”, and I do not imagine for one moment that a sourceless, eternal, all-powerful, immaterial, conscious being is a person like us. But you agree that your possible Creator probably has thought patterns in common with his creations (us), and “I wish you would remember that” and would stop pretending that you alone know which thought patterns he has or hasn’t got. However, I must admit that I have a certain prejudice which puts me more in tune with theories that make sense to me and you than with theories which don't even make sense to their proposer (you).

DAVID: You are prejudiced to form a thought-experiment humanized God who thinks as you do. My God makes perfect sense to me ever since I realized a designing mind is necessary and must exist. Pure obvious logic you lack.

dhw: As always, I accept the logic of the design argument. I do not accept your interpretation of life’s history. Hence my various alternative THEISTIC theories. I don’t know why you consider that a series of different but logical alternative theories denotes “prejudice”. I would have thought the term was far more applicable to your rigid faith in a theory which you tell us makes no sense to you or to anyone else except your God.

I've told you, over and over, God's actions make perfect sense to me. I trust He knows what He is doing for His own private reasons. He is a God you do not seem to understand, recognizing the only God you can imagine is overtly extremetly human in thought.