Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, October 04, 2022, 09:15 (779 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: A proper purposeful God, as I see Him, knew exactly how to achieve His goals. I can't imagine Him producing a series of life-supporting universes until He got it right!!

dhw: I do wish you would stop assuming that any alternative to your nonsensical theories of evolution involves a God who is not “proper purposeful”. You can be “properly purposeful” if you have a purpose and try different ways of achieving that purpose. Strangely, you can imagine your God producing billions of extinct as well as extant and presumably lifeless stars, suns, galaxies etc. until he got it right. Or do you believe that every single extinct star was an “absolute requirement” in preparation for his design of H. sapiens plus food?

DAVID: My purposeful God knows exactly what He is doing and does it without your implied experimentation. God knows the proper requirements to achieve all the goals He can conceive of. At your human level of reasoning your questioning is wrong.

If God exists, I’m sure he knows what he’s doing. If he’s experimenting, I’m sure he knows he’s experimenting, and even knows why he’s experimenting. You insist he had only one goal: H. sapiens and his food. And you tell us he designed countless dead-end life forms and foods that did not lead to us and our food. Your God sounds as if he doesn’t know what he’s doing.

DAVID: What we see in evolution is what God knew he had to create.

Who forced him? If God exists, I would propose that what we see is what he wanted to create, and what we see…here we go again…are countless organisms and ecosystems that did not lead to H. sapiens and our food, although you insist that all he wanted to create was H. sapiens and our food.

dhw: Ecosystems are created by the interplay between organisms and the environment, and they cease to exist when organisms can no longer find ways of surviving in the existing conditions. Do you agree? If so, how does this square with your God designing all of them as preparation for us and our ecosystems?

DAVID: My God created ecosystems that ended when no longer needed since the evolutionary fauna were gone.

For the umpteenth time, needed for what? The evolutionary fauna were “gone” because they could no longer survive in the prevailing conditions. And since these dead ends did not lead to us and our food, clearly they could not have been “needed” as preparations for us and our food, which - here we go again - is why your theory makes no sense!

Ecosystem importance

QUOTE: " If the organisms at the very bottom were removed, all other parts of the food chain above them would collapse too," he added. (David’s bold)

DAVID: Note my bold. It covers the Darwinist fairy tale for evolution, but it contains a kernel of truth in red. Ecosystems start at their bottom and their bottoms must survive.

dhw: What fairy tale? The microcosm reflects the macrocosm: right from the beginning, evolution has progressed by organisms finding more and more ways of surviving. I have no idea why you have bolded the obvious fact that the food chain depends on the organisms at the bottom. Do you think anyone would disagree? And none of this is relevant to your theory that all extinct, dead-end organisms and ecosystems were specially designed in preparation for us and our food. Please stop using the importance and nature of ecosystems (on which there is no disagreement) as a diversion from the illogicality of your theory.

DAVID: What is illogical is your complaint that evolutionary ecosystems stopped. See above.

I have not complained that they stopped! I have explained why they “stopped”, and have pointed out that the obvious comments concerning the importance of the organisms at the bottom have nothing whatsoever to do with your illogical theory.