Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, July 17, 2022, 08:42 (858 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw […] : you refuse to recognize that it is YOUR THEORY that is “incomprehensible” to me and to you.

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

dhw: If God exists, he would have chosen to evolve (but by this you mean specially design) ALL species from bacteria, and although you claim that his one and only aim was to evolve (= design) sapiens plus food, the vast majority of the life forms and econiches you say he designed had no connection with sapiens plus food. You can find no logic in this theory, so why do you keep leaving out all the bits that make it illogical and then pretending I am at fault in repeating your own agreement that it “makes sense only to God”?

DAVID: All your so-called bits and pieces exist only in your mind. It is all held together by my acceptance that God chose to evolve us, the most improbable result if chance is considered. I'm simply following Adler.

The so-called bits and pieces are all the theories you have been advocating on this forum for years and years. They are not held together by the fact that we evolved, because according to you, sapiens and food were your God’s one and only purpose, and yet he also evolved (= individually designed) countless extinct life forms and econiches that had no connection with us. And you have told us that Adler does not cover this blatant logical flaw in your theory, but even if he did, why should I accept illogical arguments just because they follow him?

Water flies adapt to avoid capture
DAVID: I wish you would finally recognize the importance of each ecosystem.

dhw: I wish you would finally recognize that each ecosystem is and was of life-and-death importance to all the organisms that live(d) in it, but that does NOT mean that every extinct ecosystyem was specially designed by your God or that, despite the fact that the vast majority had no connection with sapiens plus food, each one was an “absolute requirement” for his design of sapiens and our food!

DAVID: Then we agree ecosystems evolved all the way from bacteria to humans. And all were required developing steps to reach humans.

What??? That is the absurdly illogical conclusion which lies at the heart of our dispute! If your God individually designed countless life forms and econiches that had no connection with sapiens and our food, how can they all have been “required” to reach humans??? You don’t know. This absurd theory of yours “makes sense only to God.” Why do you keep promulgating a theory that makes no sense to you?

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

dhw: What “directionality”? Evolution shows us a bush of life that branched out in countless directions, with the vast majority of the branches having died out and having played “no role in current time”. You want to focus on one single “direction” (sapiens plus food) and ignore all the rest that had no connection with sapiens plus food.

DAVID: The obvious directionality is increasing complexity reached in our brain.

What about the countless life forms that had no connection with us and our brain?

DAVID: God always makes sense to me, but yours doesn't.

dhw: We are not talking about “God” but about your theories concerning your God’s motives and methods. What did you mean when you told us that your theories “made sense only to God” if you did NOT mean they didn’t make sense to you?

DAVID: I accept God's production of our reality makes perfect sense to me, but the issue you stumble over is I don't know why He chose evolution as His method for his own reasons, which 'make sense only to God'.

That is not what I stumble over. I have provided several alternative theories to explain why – if he exists - he chose evolution to produce the countless number of life forms and econiches that constitute the history of life on Earth, including those which had no connection with sapiens and our food.

dhw: You say your theory “makes sense only to God”. It certainly doesn’t make sense to me, and your statement can only mean that it doesn’t make sense to you either. Of course you are welcome to believe in a theory which doesn’t make sense to you, but that really doesn’t lend much credence to the theory, does it?

DAVID: Your constant interpretation of my thoughts is so twisted and lacks so much insight into my thinking it seems impossible for me to explain it, but I have tried above.

How can you possibly explain a theory which “makes sense only to God”? Please tell me which of these “interpretations of your thoughts” are twisted: 1) God’s one and only purpose was to “evolve” (= design) sapiens plus food. 2) God individually “evolved” (= designed) countless life forms and econiches that had no connection with sapiens plus food. 3) God designed some species (Cambrian) that had no precursors (i.e. that did not evolve in stages).