Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, October 31, 2022, 11:24 (752 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: […] The question you can’t answer here is why for 3.X billion years he designed giant bushes of life, the vast majority of whose branches had no connection with what you say was his one and only purpose. […]

DAVID: […] We are the surprising result, if natural evolution is accepted. That is Adler's point: our amazing brain with its fully capable consciousness had to be a result of direct God activity, not nature.

dhw: The whole design argument is based on the principle that ALL life forms are too complex to have been the result of what you call “natural” evolution. Are you now telling us that, for instance, the brontosaurus was NOT a surprising result if “natural” evolution was accepted?

DAVID: The form of the brontosaurus is not the surprise issue. It is our brain!!!

dhw: So if by “naturally” you mean that your God did not design it, you are not surprised that the brontosaurus evolved naturally, and yet you insist that your God designed every life form, econiche, lifestyle, strategy and natural wonder! Birds can’t even migrate “naturally” and possums can’t even feign death “naturally” – that would be too “surprising” for you!

DAVID: Total misinterpretation: Your misinterpretation comes from your diminished view of the human brain. Our brain is Adler's proof of God who designed all.

There is no “diminished view” of our brain! Do you or do you not believe that the complexities of ALL life forms are such that they provide evidence for God the designer? In any case, yet again you have switched the subject from why your God designed all the dead ends, if all he wanted was us and our food, to our brilliant brains proving God’s existence. Please stop dodging!

DAVID: My dodge is my interpretation of the history of evolution as created by God. We are here and from the round-about method you criticize. God wanted us here as the endpoint of evolution.

Even if he did want us as the “endpoint”, you insist that all the dead ends he designed were “necessary” for us and our food although they had no connection with us or our food. That makes no sense. If all he wanted was us and our food, then all that was “necessary” was the lines of life that would lead to us and our food. But according to you, those lines only began in the Cambrian, and even then they did not all lead to us or our food!

DAVID: You cannot deny that prior biochemical systems development and a changing/evolving Earth environment (i.e., more oxygen) set the stage for the Cambrian.

Of course I’m not denying it! I see the history of life as a continuous sequence of changing environments that triggered the innovations and the constant comings and goings of countless life forms and ecosystems, the vast majority of which did not lead to us and our ecosystems. If God exists, I see this constantly changing history as the result of what he wanted, and I assume that he would not have been forced to do anything he didn’t want to do. You can’t understand why, if we plus our food were his only purpose right from the start, he "had to" or "chose to" - your verbs vary from post to post - “evolve” [= design] us by “evolving” [= designing] all the life forms and ecosystems that did not lead to us, or why he had to/chose to “evolve” [= design] us in stages. You reject the three logical, theistic alternative explanations of history that I have proposed, and prefer to cling to your own non-explanation (these theories “make sense only to God”.) So be it. I think we have reached a “dead end”.