Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, October 12, 2022, 12:28 (562 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: As usual, you have left out that part of your theory which makes your God tunnel-visioned. God sayeth unto himself: “My one and only goal is to design sapiens and his food.” (That’s the bit you left out.) “An evolutionary process hath dead ends, and therefore in order to design sapiens and his food, I must design dead ends.” And a little PS: “I knoweth not why David Turell hath made the law that I must design dead ends in order to design what I want to design, but he knoweth best.”

DAVID: Your usual distortion. Humans plus an adequate ecosystem are the final outcome of God's evolutionary design. That is pure history with leaving out the God part. Dead ends are part of any type of evolution, and you know it.

“Pure history” shows that humans plus ecosystems containing humans, plus ecosystems that would no doubt survive very well without humans, are the latest outcome. You seem to think the story ends now. Who knows what evolution will have produced in say a million years from now (if the planet still exists)? “Any type” of evolution? I don’t know how many types of evolution you are thinking of, but once again you are simply dodging the illogicality of your theory that your all-powerful, all-knowing God had only one purpose, to design us and our food, and therefore “had to” design countless dead ends that did not lead to us. It’s nonsense, “and you know it”. (See your final comment.)

DAVID: Adler used my God's 'evolution', which is what you won't accept.

dhw: You keep telling us that Adler did NOT use “your evolution”, i.e. that your God’s one and only goal was to produce sapiens plus food and therefore he “had to” produce countless dead ends that did not lead to us and our food. You keep telling us that Adler used the uniqueness of sapiens to prove the existence of God. In any case, if Adler really did support your illogical theory, that would not make it logical!

DAVID: Adler's use of evolution is the same as mine in using the final result of evolution was humans. God had a goal/purpose of humans is the same theory for Adler and me. Your distortions are just distortions.

The dispute is not over what Adler did or didn’t say, though you keep desperately bringing him in as if he is the ultimate authority. How does Adler know what evolution will produce a million years from now? Why have you again switched from “the” goal to “a” goal. What other goals do you think your God had (apart from producing our food as well as us)? What distortions? Are you now denying that the illogical theory I have bolded above is yours?

DAVID: If God knows what He is doing, as you state, then all of evolution is His doing!

dhw: He would have known what he was doing if all of evolution was NOT of his doing (e.g. if he deliberately created a free-for-all), and if he was experimenting or getting new ideas, he would have known that he was experimenting or getting new ideas.

DAVID: Back to a dithering God not sure of how to do things. Not the God most folks think of.

Back to your silly idea that a free-for-all, or getting new ideas, means dithering. Experimenting in order to achieve a purpose is considerably less “dithering” than pursuing a purpose by designing dead ends that have nothing to do with that purpose. You have admitted as much in a roundabout way with your next comment:

DAVID: Don't include me in your fuzzy thinking. What God did makes perfect sense. What is known only to God is why He chose to evolve us over direct creation. (dhw's bold)

Not only do you have your all-powerful God incomprehensibly choosing to evolve us (i.e. design his one and only purpose in stages, although you think he is perfectly capable of direct creation as in the Cambrian), but you also have him choosing to “evolve” (= design) countless organisms and ecosystems that have no connection with his purpose! This is YOUR THEORY, not historical fact, and YOUR THEORY makes no sense to you (the reason is “known only to God”).