Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, August 18, 2022, 13:06 (611 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: All of the current bush supplies our food for our huge population.

dhw: Yes, the current bush supplies our food, and as you said yourself, past bushes supplied food for past forms of life, and the majority of these had no connection with us and our food, which makes nonsense of the theory that your God designed every extinct life form and bush, all of which were preparation and an “absolute requirement” for us and our food!

DAVID: Evolution developed a hugh bush of food as you describe. How did it get so hugh if the past didn't happen? Your objection makes no sense.
And later:
DAVID: Your constant dodge is the past has no place in the present. Totally illogical.

Where, oh where have you found a statement to the effect that the past didn’t happen??? The past contained some branches that led to us and our food, but it also contained countless branches that did NOT lead to us and our food. It is therefore illogical to say that your God designed every single branch as preparation and an “absolute requirement” for us and our food.

DAVID: We each describe different Gods, with human terms. Don't try to make them look alike, as above. They differ widely.

dhw: Of course they are different. That is the whole point! The one you describe has a purpose and method which, when combined, make no sense to you (your theories of evolution “make sense only to God”), whereas you find my various alternatives perfectly logical, but dismiss them because – just like yours – they use “human terms”!

DAVID: You've never understood How I view your God. I grant His very human form, but only then do your proposals make sense.

Thank you for granting his very human form and for agreeing that my proposals make sense.

DAVID: My God makes perfect sense to me if not to you. You seem to think I cannot think logically, and only you can.

But your very human God’s actions do not make sense to you, because your theories concerning his purpose and method of achieving that purpose “make sense only to God”. You think extremely logically when you argue the case for design, but you explicitly turn your back on logic when you propose a theory which you yourself cannot explain.

dhw: Since you are a stickler for known facts, please tell us what known facts support your belief in a divine, 3.8-billion-year-old book of instructions for the whole of evolution, or endless divine operations on and courses for endless numbers of organisms from bacteria through to H. sapiens.

DAVID: I have known facts about cells. We are discussing the here and now, not the devine. Please stick to the subject.

dhw: The subject is your theory of evolution. You dismiss the theory of cellular intelligence because you claim there are no known facts to support it. I am pointing out that there are no known facts to support your own theories (see above), so why don’t you dismiss them too?

DAVID: I'll stick to my theories, and you can stick to yours.

As you have every right to do. But please don’t dismiss mine on the grounds that there are no known facts to support my theories, when the same criticism can be levelled at your own.