Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, August 26, 2022, 11:15 (602 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I accept God's historical works in our recorded history. My analyses then try to understand why God did it that way. They make sense to me. if not to you.

dhw: You may try to analyse why he would have fulfilled his one and only purpose by designing countless life forms and foods that had no connection with his purpose, but you cannot find a single reason, and therefore you tell us that your theories “make sense only to God”, i.e. not to you. Please stop dodging.

DAVID: I have given you the food supply reason and you reject it illogically. They make perfect sense to me.

You have consistently told us that we humans need a huge food supply. Who could possibly disagree? But you have not explained why your God designed countless life forms and food supplies that did not lead to us and our food supply.

DAVID: I have always said all the past bushes form the current bush of food supply. Why do you distort again!

You must be joking. Since when have we humans dined on tinned trilobites and braised brontosaurus and roast raptor? How often must I quote you? “The current bush of food is NOW for humans NOW. There were smaller bushes in the PAST for PAST forms” and “extinct life has no role in current time.” (Your own block capitals.)

DAVID: The present comes from the ongoing evolutionary past. Stop slicing up evolution!

dhw: Of course the present comes from the past! But that does not mean that every single life form and food of the past was preparation for and led to H. sapiens and our present food, though you claim that we and our food were your God’s one and only purpose! [See below.]

DAVID: dhw makes slight of the necessary food supply in His constant illogical complaint. God knew the burgeoning human population had to have enough food. Look at this new analysis of our new food supply crisis:

Aw shucks, David, You don’t have to be God to know that humans, just like our fellow animals, need “enough food”!

QUOTES: "In the wake of Russia’s war on Ukraine, the global community is scrambling. […] "Crises hit women and girls especially hard, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. […] It is estimated that the COVID-19 pandemic pushed an additional 47 million girls and women into extreme poverty, […] In 2021, at least 150 million more women than men were experiencing food insecurity, and the gap is growing."

DAVID: […] but the point is made: we are not managing our huge evolutionary bush of food properly. The food dhw poo-poos.

Sorry, but this is daft. I do not poo-poo food, and I am as appalled as you at human mismanagement of food supplies. This has nothing to do with your illogical theory bolded above for the thousandth time. Your dodging is becoming embarrassing!

DAVID: dhw makes slight of the necessary food supply in His constant illogical complaint. God knew the burgeoning human population had to have enough food. Look at this new analysis of our new food supply crisis:

QUOTES: "Food webs influence ecosystem diversity and functioning. Contemporary defaunation has reduced food web complexity, […] Food webs underwent steep regional declines in complexity through loss of food web links after the arrival and expansion of human populations."

DAVID: Same old story. All of the giant bush of evolution is a food supply for the huge human population. And all we do is unthinkingly damage it. And dhw distorts the importance of it.

The PAST bushes of evolution were not ALL a food supply for the huge human population, which did not even exist for 3.X billion years. But yes, we humans are unthinkingly damaging the current bush. As above, your dodges are become embarrassing.

DAVID: He doesn't create out of self-interest.

dhw: How do you know? In any case, "self-interest" means you only care about yourself, and that is very different from creating things you enjoy creating and find interesting. We may want to have children because we like the idea of parenthood, but that doesn’t mean we only care about ourselves. If your God is loving, maybe he created life because he liked the idea of having something to love. Would you dismiss that as “self-interest”?

DAVID: I can see it as self-interest. Adler thinks He cares about us at the 50/50 level of possibility. Which means we cannot know.

Of course we can’t know. So please stop making authoritative comments like “He doesn’t create out of self-interest.” 50/50 is not a rejection, and besides, you think he does care!

dhw: […] you actually agree with me that your God wouldn’t create if he didn’t enjoy creating, and you are equally certain that he is interested in his creations. And so I find it incomprehensible that you should consider it impossible that he might create BECAUSE he enjoys creating and BECAUSE he wants to create things he will find interesting.

DAVID: Self-interesting aspects of His creations do not drive my form of my God's personality.

And yet you are sure he "enjoys" and is "interested". But I know you reject any interpretation that differs from your own. That does not make your guesses any more valid than mine.