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

by David Turell , Friday, July 15, 2022, 15:26 (860 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: My thinking in no way parallels yours. I have no 'objective truth' but have reached conclusions 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that God's existence is required. I simply accept what God does for His own reasons, something that is incomprehensible to you.

dhw: How many more times do I need to repeat that I am not challenging the logic of your design argument for God’s existence? But in the context of evolution, what you accept is your theory about his reason (singular) for creating the vast bush of life (to create sapiens plus food) and your theory about what he did (individually designed countless life forms and foods that had no connection with sapiens plus food). You cannot find any logic in the combination of these two theories, which “makes sense only to God”, and yet you refuse to recognize that it is YOUR THEORY that is “incomprehensible” to me and to you.

Same logic you reject: God chose to evolve us from Archaea. Evolution connects all forms

DAVID: My guesses about God's thoughts comes from a background of considering God as extremely purposeful and never needy like yours.

dhw: My guess is unequivocal: that if God exists he would have had a purpose in creating life. And I have no doubt that he would have pursued that purpose without what you rightly call “deviations” (e.g. creating countless life forms that had no connection with the only life form he intended to create). “As for needy”, since you ignored the comment you were supposed to be answering, I will repeat it:
dhw: […] Was your God’s desire to create humans a “need”? Actually, your own guess was that he wanted us to admire his work and have a relationship with him. That sounds more “needy” to me than the desire, for instance, to create something out of enjoyment and interest. In any case, your dismissal of my alternatives does not make your own theory any the less “nonsensical”.

"Needy" implies more than a desire for a possible relationship with us. My point is God might have wanted to create us recognizing Him but not in a 'must need' sense.

DAVID: According to Adler there is a way as to how to properly think about God in a book by that name. I have the book. Yes, only God knows but there is human guidance.

dhw: Dawkins’ “God Delusion” also tells us how to think about God! Why do you always quote
Adler, as if somehow he knows what only God knows. In any case, you have told us repeatedly that he doesn’t cover your illogical theory of evolution.

DAVID: His book assumes my view of evolution leading to humans by God's designs.

dhw: But you have told us that he does not tell us that his God created life for the one and only purpose of creating humans plus food and therefore individually designed countless life forms and foods that had no connection with humans. In any case, I don’t know why you keep quoting Adler as if he had a hotline to God.

His hotline is much better than yours

Water flies adapt to avoid capture
DAVID: back to the same issue: species adaptation or help from God.

dhw: “Help from God” in what form? According to you, he programmed all these adaptations 3.8 billion years ago, or he kept popping in to dabble – in this case changing water flies’ bodies presumably because that was an “absolute requirement” for us humans to have enough food to live on. How about God’s help in the form of autonomous cellular intelligence, which enables life forms to adapt in order to survive (though of course not always successfully – hence all the extinctions!) without his having to keep popping in to do a dabble?

DAVID: I wish you understood designer problems. Secondhand deigning is very cumbersome.

dhw: I wish you understood how absurd it is to assume that your God either preprogrammed water fly defences 3.8 billion years ago or popped in to do a dabble because water fly defences were an “absolute requirement” for the design of sapiens plus our food.

I wish you would finally recognize the importance of each ecosystem.

Horizontal gene transfer at all levels

DAVID: HGT is a major evolutionary mechanism and as I view God's controls, a way He can step in for a 'dabble'.

dhw: As I view it, this would be a way in which your God could have organized a free-for-all, through which autonomous cells would have created the vast variety of life forms extant and extinct that constitute the history of life on Earth.

Free-for-alls do not show the directionality evolution shows.